• Meta will give its investors free shares if Mark Zuckerberg hits certain "extraordinary" targets.
• It will pay 1:1 share dividends each time Meta stock doubles and has compounded at over 10% a year.
• Meta is rolling out Class C shares to address Zuckerberg's tax concerns and keep him in California.

Meta stockholders are set to receive free shares if Mark Zuckerberg absolutely crushes it as CEO.

The social-media giant revealed in a Wednesday filing that if its upcoming Class C shares double from a baseline price of $580.60 to just over $1,161, and their compound annualized return since September 10 has been at least 10%, shareholders will receive a dividend: a Class C share for every Meta share they own.

If Meta stock — specifically its 30-day volume-weighted average price — doubles again to around $2,322, and has risen by at least 10% on average per year, shareholders will receive the same dividend again, and so on.

Meta, which owns Facebook, WhatsApp, Instagram, and the AI agent Muse, acknowledged how difficult it will be to unlock those dividends, describing the stock price targets as "extraordinary" in its filing.

Its stock has already surged more than sevenfold from its November 2022 low, giving Meta a nearly $1.8 trillion market capitalization that ranks it among the 10 most valuable companies in the world.

The additional dividends would be paid on top of the initial dividend declared by Meta's board on Wednesday, which will see Class A and Class B shareholders receive Class C shares on a 1:1 basis, likely in late January.

Meta is rejigging its share structure in response to Zuckerberg's concerns about California's so-called billionaire tax: a one-off, 5% wealth tax on the roughly 250 billionaires living in the state.

Zuckerberg, who ranked fifth on the Bloomberg Billionaires Index with a $247 billion net worth at Wednesday's close, will be able to sell the Class C shares to access the liquidity needed to pay the tax, avoiding a sale of his existing shares that would erode his voting power.

Meta's board took action after Zuckerberg said he was considering moving out of California because of the potential tax, and cautioned that the steps involved in relocating, such as listing his home for sale, could spark questions from employees about the company's management, the filing says.

• Visiting Utah in the winter isn't for everyone.
• I learned that the hard way in January 2025.
• My first mistake led to the rest.

Gazing out my window at the snowcapped mountains on the train to Utah, I had no idea that I'd already set myself up for regret. Some mistakes were set in motion before I'd even left my apartment.

In January 2025, I flew from my home in NYC to Denver and hopped on a 15-hour Amtrak train to Utah's Silicon Slopes — a tech hub lining the Wasatch Front that includes Salt Lake City, Park City, and the surrounding suburbs.

I spent three days exploring Utah's pocket of luxury amid ski season and left with four regrets.

My first mistake was booking my trip in the peak winter season as a non-skier.

As a first-time visitor to Salt Lake City and Park City, I thought seeing the mountains blanketed in snow would be awe-inspiring — and it really was.

I knew winter would be a popular time to visit Utah since it's a ski hub, but I underestimated how busy it would be. Park City was packed with winter sports enthusiasts.

Skiers and snowboarders crowded the sidewalks lining congested streets in downtown Park City, all suited up — some with gear in tow.

I stopped by the slopes at Deer Valley Resort and spotted long lines of skiers waiting for lifts. I waited in line to ride a funicular up and down the mountain.

Maybe seeing the snow was worth the crowds — I won't know for sure until I visit during another season. But had I realized I'd be visiting during the busiest time of year, I would have pushed my trip to the spring, during the shoulder season.

I didn't pack enough clothing.

Overpacking is a rookie mistake when traveling, so I go to great lengths to avoid stuffing too many outfits into my bag. But this time, I overcorrected.

When packing for a trip that's less than a week long, I typically only bring layers I can wear all at once when needed or mix and match. Since I was traveling in winter, I brought a couple of extra shirts, one additional pair of pants, and zero extra outer layers.

But in January along Utah's Wasatch Front, when temperatures ranged from 24 to 44 degrees Fahrenheit, I needed to wear most of my layers daily.

After bundling up for a flight and a train ride, I felt desperate for fresh layers when I arrived in Salt Lake City.

Doing laundry at the hotel was another mistake.

What do you do when you need clean clothes on the road? Utilizing the hotel's laundry services seemed the most straightforward solution, but I regretted it.

That night, I stayed at the five-star Grand America Hotel, where laundry services were top-tier. My shirts and sweaters were returned to me on hangers, each in an individual hotel-branded bag. Smaller items were wrapped in paper in a cardboard box.

I felt like I was opening a present as I sorted through my clean clothes. It excited me — until I saw the receipt.

I paid $115 for three shirts, two pairs of pants, one hoodie, six undergarments, and one two-piece blazer. It was certainly the most luxurious laundry service I'd ever experienced, but for the same money, I could have bought a whole new outfit — and what a great excuse it would have been to treat myself.

I should have made time for winter activities aside from skiing and snowboarding.

I didn't consider other winter activities I could have enjoyed besides skiing and snowboarding.

I wish I'd taken time to tour Utah Olympic Park in the snow and get a feel for what it was like during the 2002 Winter Olympics.

After my trip, I learned that Park City offers mountain-top snowshoe yoga classes, which I would have loved to try.

Next time I travel to the Silicon Slopes, I'll pack enough clothing and make use of the season's offerings.

• I love the fall, and every year, my family and I visit the Catskill Mountains.
• To make the most of the trip, my two sons usually take a day or two off school.
• However, missing the time sometimes causes stress, and I wish they had personal days.

Fall is my favorite time of year, and it just so happens that our most loved destination — the Catskill Mountains — is breathtaking in October. When we first started our Catskill family getaways in 2020, we went in the summer when the landscape was lush and green. We've been there in winter to witness snow-covered mountains and in spring, when the ground is thawing. However, my favorite time to visit is during peak foliage in autumn. I refuse to miss the colorful mountainscape simply because my kids don't get a fall break.

But taking a couple of days off is not as simple as it should be.

Making up the work can be daunting

This year, my boys are in middle and high school, and we wanted to take two days off school to extend a weekend; however, a hefty workload left them uneasy about missing more than one day. I encouraged them to ask their teachers for work ahead of time so they wouldn't be scrambling to catch up later, but most teachers didn't have lesson plans completed in advance.

While away, they logged in to their school program in between activities to complete some work remotely. When we returned home on Sunday, they finished some lingering assignments, but they weren't completely caught up from the one missed school day until later that week.

My 15-year-old is less fazed by having to complete makeup work. A day away from school doesn't stress him all that much. But my 12-year-old reminds me of myself when I was a student; he worries about the work until it's completed. I wish we could escape for a day or two without the stress of math worksheets and language arts passages looming over his head. Kids deserve a few days away from school each year, no questions asked.

There's value in spending time with family

This year, again, we escaped to a fall wonderland that my children will never forget. We took a short walk to an overlook to see the foliage from above, visited the Sundown Wild Forest where a yellow canopy covered Peekamoose Blue Hole, and continued our yearly tradition of visiting the Bethel Woods Center for their Peace, Love and Pumpkins festival after dark.

The next day, we took a ski lift to the top of Hunter Mountain to admire the fall views from another vantage point. At night, we spent time around the fire pit listening to water rush over rocks in the nearby stream. We had family meals together at restaurants and a night in, cooking at our cabin in the woods. It was a cozy experience that no school day will ever provide.

Giving kids personal days would make much-needed family getaways more accessible

Our school district — in compliance with state laws — focuses heavily on attendance. They communicate their strict attendance expectations during orientations, back-to-school night, and via email. In fact, in the past, when we were unaware that a doctor's note was required for sick days, our kids accrued the 10 allowable guardian-reported absences, and then, alarmingly, a truancy note arrived in our mailbox.

But what if kids were given personal days? What if they could take a few days off each year without having to make up all the work? We should recognize that resetting in nature is self-care. Spending time with family in the great outdoors should be encouraged.

I want them to be able to escape stress-free

Many companies provide their employees with a few personal days each year. We recognize that situations arise — aside from illness — that may require someone to take a day or two off. Why do we fail to provide the same for our kids? With the growing demands and complexity of childhood today, they may need it even more than we do.

Our fall visits to the Catskills are perfection, and they will always be worth a day or two away from school. But I wish we could escape completely, free from quizzes, book reports, and math worksheets. Perhaps one day sneaking to the mountains will be stress-free just as it should have been all along.

• After our second child, my husband and I were struggling to balance our jobs and household admin.
• To outsource some of the cooking, I found a local chef to batch-cook meals for us once a month.
• Having a freezer packed with homemade meals saved us time, and I learned a lot from the chef.

When I returned to work after my second maternity leave, our family of four found ourselves very short on free time.

Back then, my husband and I had jobs in finance in London. We were working long hours, with video calls stretching from seven in the morning to nine at night.

On weekdays, like most families with young children, we felt like we were in a never-ending cycle of rushing everywhere. Our plates were filled with nursery drop-offs and pickups, Teams calls, making dinner, cleaning up, and getting the kids ready for bed and baths, with household chores and personal admin to be completed in what was left of our free time.

Though we had full-time childcare, we had little else in the way of daily support, as our families were not local.

In our social circle, we knew that dual-career parents with young children often bought supermarket-ready meals or ordered takeout. However, these options often felt too high in salt and sugar, and limited in their selection.

That was how I found myself posting in a Facebook group for Malaysian moms in the UK, desperately trying to find someone to cook for us.

I wasn't envisioning a personal chef who would shop and make three meals a day — our budget didn't stretch that far — rather, I hoped to find a decent home cook and had a few hours to make big, batch meals that we could freeze, then reheat on our busy weekdays.

That was how we found Evelyn.

For $150 a visit, we paid for someone to batch-cook meals for our family

Evelyn was an experienced pastry chef on furlough, like many in the food-service industry at the time — we connected in 2020, amid the COVID-19 pandemic.

She lived in a neighboring borough in London, which made our arrangement convenient. Equally as important, she was good at cooking Chinese-Malaysian dishes.

She would visit once a month, for about four to six hours. Our arrangement cost us around $150 per visit at the time. Before she arrived, we would discuss the menu over WhatsApp. Crucially, the dishes had to be easy to freeze and easy to reheat.

I would then shop for the ingredients she needed, which meant a combination of online grocery shopping and trips to Chinatown for less-common items.

On her visit, she would cook large portions of three dishes, which she further subdivided into another three family-sized portions. In total, we had around nine portions, which were then packed into containers and frozen — like a supermarket-ready meal, but tastier and probably healthier.

The meals she cooked were Malaysian Nyonya or Chinese-Malaysian dishes: ayam tempra (chicken dish), chai boey (a delicious sour and spicy stew with leftover roast meat), babi pongteh (a braised pork dish), and chicken with ginger and spring onion.

The 4-year arrangement had both expected and unexpected benefits

As a result of Evelyn's visits, we did not spend precious hours batch cooking on the weekends. We could spend our limited free time with our children.

Although her meals did not completely replace the need for us to cook, the constant everyday drudgery of preparing food was partially mitigated. On weekdays, after a long day of work calls, I would grab a container out of the fridge and pair it with plain white rice.

And the biggest unexpected benefit was that she taught us more of my culture. Though I'm Chinese-Malaysian, I was never taught how to cook growing up. When I started living independently, my cooking repertoire did not extend much beyond pasta, curry chicken, and whatever I could learn from YouTube videos.

Nothing compares to being shown what to cook and how to do it by a more experienced person. It was a learning experience for me to hunt for the ingredients that Evelyn had asked for in the local Chinese grocery store. On one of my trips, I had gotten a vegetable that I believed to be kai choy (Chinese mustard green), only to be told by Evelyn that it was choy sum (Chinese flowering cabbage).

By watching her, I also learned about different types of tofu and which work best for various dishes, plus how to get a good sear on meat (very high heat and a willingness to tolerate oil splatter).

Evelyn continued to come to our place every month or so until we left London about four years later. We did not restart an arrangement like this in our new place, as the kids were older and our jobs were more flexible.

I am a firm believer that you have to make your own village in this modern world, especially for those of us who have found careers far away from our families of origin. So I am forever grateful to Evelyn for her help in the intense years with babies and young children.

We had been looking for a "batch-cooking service," but instead we got a stand-in "aunty."

• Target just remodeled its SoHo store with a larger emphasis on style and design.
• The store showcases a curated sample from Target's full merchandise assortment.
• Target invited Business Insider for an exclusive first look ahead of the location's reopening.

Target is doubling down on its SoHo concept store.

Less than a year after remodeling the store's main floor, the bullseye retailer went back in to reimagine the rest of the footprint that anchors Target in one of the world's top shopping districts.

"It was probably more of a glorified convenience store," Target's chief brand officer Michelle Mesenberg told Business Insider during an exclusive walkthrough ahead of Thursday's reopening.

Located at the corner of Broadway and East Houston Street, the SoHo store shares the block with trendy shops like Prada, Arc'teryx, and Allsaints. While last year's renovation bumped up the store's aesthetics, Mesenberg said it was still more of a spot for people to grab essentials on their way to somewhere else.

"Nearly 70,000 people cross this corner every single day," she said. "We wanted to make sure that we were putting our best foot forward when it came to our brand."

Last year's remodel featured an extended entrance experience that calls to mind a deconstructed Target logo.

It's now stocked with apparel-forward displays that also feature select merchandise from other categories.

"It's focused on apparel, but you'll see us mix in the best of beauty, the best of home, and so we're really completing the picture for a guest," Target's director of curation, Matthew Arrington, told Business Insider.

Further back on the main floor, a new section features a more immersive presentation of seasonal merchandise.

"What this space does is it puts a point of view on our edit for the season, and that allows people to come in and see our product through a different lens," Mesenberg said.

Last year's remodel of the SoHo store's beauty section also set the tone for this year's broader launch of Target's Beauty Studio, which has replaced the retailer's partnership with Ulta.

"We've been able to also bring in other beauty founders and creators and celebrity makeup artists to the space, and so it gives them a place to continue to tell that beauty story across Target," Arrington said.

Mesenberg said Target sees its stores serving in part as studios for content creators, and no store does it quite like the SoHo store.

"Brands want to be in this location — this is prime real estate," she said.

The newly remodeled lower level features a futuristic discovery section that features trending items across several categories like toys, sports fandom, and gadgets.

"We take a high-curation lens here, based upon what's happening in culture at any given point in time." Mesenberg said.

Imagine distilling an entire aisle from a typical suburban Target store and distilling it into one shelf of the trendiest items — that's the SoHo store's "Explorer's Lab."

The store has to navigate a balancing act to meet the expectations of the various kinds of customers it serves.

From college students at NYU who need dorm snacks, to international tourists who need a new suitcase, to local New Yorkers simply trying to grab a roll of paper towels, the SoHo store still carries the essentials and more.

Almost everything in the SoHo store is also available at Target stores across the US, but the intense focus on curation and fresh features is meant to elevate items that shoppers might not realize are right at their fingertips.

For Arrington, that means making very tough choices about which colors, brands, or pack sizes get display space. Shoppers can still get Target's full selection online or at another store.

Even as Target leans harder into style and design, the SoHo store still aims to deliver on the basics shoppers expect when they walk in the door.

"People still want their Tide pens. Tide pens are one of the top sellers in the store. Bananas are one of the top sellers in the store. We have a very big, bold, proud assortment of both," Mesenberg said.

It's an approach that yields interesting outcomes on the shelves. Established national brands shoppers expect are next to emerging ones they might have heard about on TikTok.

"When we have a founder-led or celebrity-led or creator-led brand that we want to celebrate, this becomes a destination for them," Arrington said.

Mesenberg said that while brand awareness for Target is a particular focus of the SoHo store, that's not at the expense of going after strong sales.

The SoHo store is and will remain a "one of one" format for Target, Mesenberg said, but it is playing a growing role in the company's overall strategy.

"We're pulling elements of what we're learning here. It may not translate exactly one for one, but the influence is coming into the chain," she said.

• I used to work as a flight attendant, and I prefer passengers keep the shades closed during flights.
• Passengers are typically calmer and sleepier when the cabin is dark, which worked well for us.
• Shades should only be open during takeoff and landing, which is the best time for photos anyway.

There's a long-standing, quiet battle happening in airplane cabins around the world, and it's all about window shades.

Who actually owns control of the shade — the person sitting in the window seat, the cabin crew, or the row as a collective? (Opinions remain fairly divided.) Is it better for the shade to stay open or closed throughout the flight?

Between viral social media debates and endless discussions on flight etiquette, everyone seems to have an opinion, and so do I. For nearly a decade, I worked as a flight attendant with an international airline.

That means I've examined thousands of window shades before takeoff and landing to ensure they were open, just as I checked seatbacks were upright.

Many airlines require the shades to be open during these times, which makes sense to me from a safety standpoint. It's helpful to have a clear view outside in an emergency, and in case ground rescue teams need to see inside the plane.

However, once we hit cruising altitude, those safety rules pause, and my personal one kicks in: The window shades should be closed while we're in the air.

I've found that open shades can ruin sleep cycles and make a cabin rowdier

I honestly hate it when passengers keep their shades wide open, and it's especially bad on long, international flights. I know firsthand how crossing multiple time zones can be exhausting for the body.

Often, the best way to save passengers from severe jet lag is to help them get quality sleep in the air — and let's be honest, as a flight attendant, I definitely had a vested interest in keeping everyone happy and well-rested.

So, on long flights, my crew and I would intentionally dim the cabin lights to simulate nighttime and encourage everyone to rest. Even so, it only took one open window shade to ruin that peaceful environment for an entire section of the plane.

When blinding sunlight poured in, it didn't just wake sleeping passengers — it also created a terrible glare on laptops, tablets, and phones.

I've lost track of how many frustrated passengers rang their call buttons to complain to me about it, and how often I ended up having to mediate arguments about window shades.

Early on in my career, I also observed how ambient light seemed to directly change passenger behavior. Whenever we dimmed the cabin lights, travelers seemed to naturally settle down, read quietly, or go to sleep.

But when a flight stayed brightly lit, passengers more often stayed awake, chatted loudly, and ordered more alcohol, sometimes turning the flight into a party.

All in all, keeping the cabin dark tended to make the entire flight so much calmer, safer, and easier for us to manage. As my colleagues and I always used to say: A sleeping passenger is the best passenger!

If you're looking for good views and photos, you're better off waiting anyway

One of the most common reason passengers give for keeping their shades up is to take photos or enjoy the view. Although I completely understand the desire for a great aerial shot, the reality at 35,000 feet is usually underwhelming.

Most of the time, all you can see out the window is blinding white haze, cloud cover, or vast emptiness. The direct sunlight at high altitudes is often too harsh for a clean picture anyway.

If you really want great photos for your travel feed, the best time to take them is during descent and approach.

As the plane lowers toward the destination, you can actually get a clear, detailed view of cities, coastlines, and landscapes — and during those moments, the shades are already usually required to be open for safety reasons anyway.

Ultimately, though, the status of the shade is up to the passenger

Unlike takeoff and landing, where keeping shades open is often a mandatory safety rule, mid-flight shade policy is more about etiquette.

As flight attendants, we couldn't strictly enforce or mandate that passengers close them, as window-shade status isn't regulated by the Federal Aviation Administration.

However, many of us made a point of strongly requesting and encouraging the shades to be shut for the comfort of the whole cabin.

Now, whenever I'm sitting in the window seat as a passenger, I practice what I preach. The shade stays wide open for takeoff, goes straight down as soon as we hit cruising altitude, and pops back up on our final approach.

Pulling that shade down mid-flight is a tiny move, but it makes a world of difference. It can help keep the cabin dark and calm, let your fellow passengers sleep, and prevent a full-blown glare dispute at 35,000 feet.

• Mechanized assaults have been rare in Ukraine, but amid a major offensive, its forces pulled off two.
• The Ukrainian commander behind the operation doubted the assaults would succeed.
• He said using armored vehicles now needs extensive planning and support, much like a special operation.

A massive Ukrainian operation retaking territory from Russian forces has shown that assaults with tanks and armored vehicles are still possible in a drone-heavy war, but far more support and planning are now necessary to execute them.

Tanks and other armored vehicles have faced serious challenges on battlefields dominated by drones, mines, and artillery, prompting both sides to move away, tactically speaking, from large-scale mechanized assaults. Those decisions have led observers to question whether tanks still have a role in modern warfare.

Those discussions have taken a new turn in the wake of recent Ukrainian combat operations.

Ukrainian forces involved in Operation Vivaldi, a counteroffensive that has so far taken back 277 square kilometers of territory, carried out two successful mechanized assaults behind Russian lines this week, Brigadier General Andrii Biletskyi, the commander of Ukraine's Third Army Corps, the unit conducting the operation, told the Ukrainian outlet Militarnyi.

George Barros, the director of innovation at the Institute for the Study of War, a US think tank, told Business Insider that this appears to be "the first successful mechanized tactical level breakthrough in a drone-dominated battlefield."

Sharing details of the operation, Biletskyi said he had been skeptical it could be done, remaining unsure until the last minute whether armored vehicles could be used successfully, but he decided to allow brigade commanders to try.

The assaults required extensive preparation and coordination. "Today, the use of armored vehicles is effectively a special operation. It requires extremely detailed planning and the coordination of a huge number of assets," Biletskyi told Militarnyi, a Ukrainian military news site.

Barros said that while the assault's territorial gains were limited, he believes it is the most consequential and meaningful offensive in theater and in military science observed so far.

"It's a really big deal," he said. "It decisively proves that it is possible to achieve mechanized maneuver at the tactical level in a drone-dominated battlefield."

The mission planning involved separate training for vehicle crews and infantry, fitting vehicles with additional equipment, and extensive support to shield the advance. Biletskyi did not specify the equipment used, but electronic warfare, additional armor, and supporting drones and robots are among the kinds of tools that can help protect assault forces.

"The big lesson here is that the tank isn't dead, and the tank isn't obsolete," Barros said, "but rather the prerequisites to make the tank useful have become lengthy and extensive and very difficult to achieve, but all the same important and critical for success on the battlefield."

The challenge is replicating that success. Such assaults require more resources and preparation time than some units can reasonably dedicate to the mission. Barros noted that very few Ukrainian units are as well trained and well equipped as the Third Army Corps, Vivaldi's lead unit.

But if Ukraine is successful in proliferating these lessons and tactics into other elements of its armed forces, "then we will have a Ukrainian military that is extremely capable and able to roll back the Russians, whereas the Russians still lag potentially years behind the Ukrainians in terms of being able to conduct these kinds of maneuvers," he said.

The recent Vivaldi assaults build on a broader effort to bring armored vehicles back into bigger offensive breakthrough operations.

ISW observed in May that Ukraine, for the first time since 2023, was beginning to carry out more frequent mechanized counterattacks, including using armored vehicles in front-line attacks.

In August, ISW assessed that Ukraine had been able to reintroduce limited mechanized maneuver through improved planning, suppression of Russian air defenses, and an emerging drone advantage. And by October, the think tank had detected an edge for Ukraine in these kinds of renewed operations.

Biletskyi said this week that the mechanized assault allowed his forces to achieve the partial encircling of the settlement of Nove and the deployment of infantry behind Russian lines to attack drone operators concealed in wooded areas.

He said the attacks degraded Russia's ability to conduct drone operations and gather battlefield intelligence, setting conditions for a tactical breakthrough.

Eliminating drone operators is key, Barros said, because it allows Ukrainian forces to push forward. It's something he said Ukraine has become better at over the course of the year, which was why Ukrainian vehicles were able to advance further. Vivaldi's leaders have emphasized the importance of shaping the battlefield by weakening the enemy first, including through the use of artillery, drones, and robots.

The war's dense networks of drones, land mines, and artillery have made large armored assaults difficult and dangerous. Inexpensive drones, in particular, make it hard to concentrate forces and complicate maneuvers. Both sides have added protective armor while decreasing tank activity, often keeping them farther from the front.

Vivaldi shows they're not out of the fight, though.

Western partners are still betting on tanks and buying new ones, but they foresee changes in how they are supported and deployed. Officials say tanks still have a place, but their role may shift. They will need to work alongside assets like drones.

Gen. Alexus Grynkewich, NATO's Supreme Allied Commander Europe, said in May that "legacy platforms are not obsolete" but "the decisive question is the force mix: how can we combine ships, aircraft, tanks and high-end systems with robotics, drones, sensors, software and new effectors to increase lethality and better protect our soldiers?"

• Elon Musk said a shortage of training data meant teaching Tesla's Optimus robot is like raising a toddler.
• Tesla has built an "Optimus Academy" where robots can learn through "self-play," Musk told investors.
• The EV giant said on Wednesday that it had begun production of Optimus.

Tesla is sending its Optimus humanoid robot back to school.

Speaking on the company's earnings call on Wednesday, CEO Elon Musk compared training the EV maker's humanoid robot to raising a toddler.

Musk said that while Tesla's autonomous driving models can learn from data collected by its massive fleet of vehicles, its Optimus robot has to learn by watching people do tasks and practicing them itself, a process similar to how humans learn.

"You can see this when you have a toddler, and they initially are sort of wobbly, and they don't know how to do things, and eventually, they learn to wipe their own ass, which is a big milestone," Musk told investors.

"They learn to read and do all sorts of things, and they learn this by playing. And we actually need Optimus to play at scale in order to have it be really good at tasks in the real world," Musk said.

The Tesla CEO added that the company was building out an "Optimus Academy" where prototypes can practice a wide range of tasks and generate training data to teach future versions of Optimus.

"For Optimus to get the training data we need, we actually need to make a lot of Optimi. So we need to make, I think, on the order of 10,000 or 20,000 bots and then have them do self-play," said Musk.

Tesla said on Wednesday that it had begun production of Optimus at its Fremont factory, with Musk saying the company expects to begin delivering Optimus to customers by the end of next year.

The near-trillionaire cautioned that production would be "somewhat bumpy" and that development of the humanoid robot still has some way to go.

He listed the challenges of designing durable yet responsive robotic hands, as well as AI capable of handling open-ended tasks, among the main hurdles Tesla faces.

Tesla is not alone in setting up robot academies to provide training data for humanoid robots.

Unlike large language models like ChatGPT, which were trained on the vast corpus of text data available on the internet, robotics faces a shortage of real-world training data to teach humanoids to navigate the physical world.

Other startups, such as Texas-based Apptronik, have also set up "data factories" where robots load conveyor belts and sort objects to generate training data to combat the data shortage.

• Hugging Face released a new AI model that allows users to "chat with DNA."
• Carbon-X can analyze and generate DNA and allows researchers to ask questions in plain language.
• Hugging Face said the model can help researchers who work outside the big AI labs.

Hugging Face is releasing an AI model that could make it easier for scientists to study DNA and develop new genetic treatments, the company announced Thursday.

Carbon-X is a "first of its kind" model that combines DNA analysis and generation with plain language, allowing researchers to ask questions and essentially "chat with DNA," according to Lewis Tunstall, a senior research scientist at Hugging Face.

Hugging Face, which Nvidia agreed to acquire for nearly $13 billion in September, is a platform for sharing and developing AI models and also releases its own. The company worked with research labs in Italy and China on Carbon-X, which is an open-source model. Hugging Face built Carbon-X by training an existing language model, Qwen3-14B, on genomic sequences and natural language. It was trained on DNA sequences from humans, other mammals, plants, and fungi.

As an example of how Carbon-X can be used, Tunstall said a researcher could provide a DNA sequence and ask whether a particular mutation could increase a person's risk of disease. The model would then offer a prediction and explanation. It can also generate new DNA sequences, which could help researchers develop new gene therapies.

Tunstall said the company was partly motivated to build Carbon-X to prevent biology researchers from becoming dependent on the major AI labs, noting how AI has disrupted mathematics.

"If you want to really push the frontiers of mathematics, you likely have to be at one of these AI labs like OpenAI or Anthropic, because they're the ones who have the best mathematics models," he said, suggesting a similar situation is likely to play out in other fields of science.

"We wanted to provide the open research community with tools that don't make them fully dependent on some external single provider," he added.

Researchers can run Carbon-X on their own computers, avoiding the need to share sensitive patient data with external AI companies. He also said that some of the misalignment behavior observed in larger models, such as the OpenAI agents that famously hacked Hugging Face in July, has not yet been observed in smaller, more specialized models.

Tunstall said generalist chatbots also sometimes refuse to answer legitimate biology questions from researchers because they mistake them for attempts to "design a bioweapon." He said viruses were explicitly excluded from Carbon-X's training data in order to avoid misuse of the model.

While Carbon-X is likely to be used by researchers, Tunstall said the model represents a small step toward a future where AI can help provide more personalized medical care.

"I think the holy grail is, in general, this concept of personalized medicine where we're able to, as individuals, take our own patient records, our own genomes, and use this to ultimately find or even maybe design our own treatments," he said.

• Google CEO Sundar Pichai said no when Trump asked him to rename the Atlantic Ocean, the president said.
• Trump has floated the idea of renaming either the Atlantic or the Pacific to the "Trump Ocean."
• Earlier this year, he issued orders to change the names of the Gulf of Mexico and Lake Ontario.

President Donald Trump's plan to rename the Atlantic Ocean hit choppy waters when he took it to Google.

At a Wednesday rally in South Carolina, Trump said he considered putting his name or "America" on one of the two oceans that flank the US: the Atlantic and the Pacific.

"I’m not going to put either Trump or America on any other ocean but these two," he told the crowd.

Then, he said, he called Google to ask about making the change on Google Maps.

The tech giant had previously changed its US labels for the Gulf of Mexico and Lake Ontario to the Gulf of America and Lake America after executive orders from the president.

"I spoke to a brilliant guy, Sundar. He heads all of Google," Trump said, referring to CEO Sundar Pichai. He also praised Google cofounder Sergey Brin, calling both men "totally brilliant guys," before joking that they were "still rattled from the Gulf."

Trump recounted putting his idea directly to Pichai: "Sundar, I’m thinking of the Atlantic Ocean. Can you handle it?"

"No, no, no. This time I’m not doing it," Trump quoted Pichai as replying. "Oceans are different, sir. They cover really a lot of countries. Please don't ask us to do that."

"So I'll probably pass," Trump told the crowd. "Should I pass it?" He then answered his own question: "I think let's keep it the Atlantic Ocean."

Google did not immediately respond to a request for comment.

It was not Trump's first ocean pitch. At a Tennessee rally in early October, he floated "Trump Ocean" or "Ocean of the Americas" for the Atlantic or Pacific.

He has also mused about renaming a river, calling New Mexico "New America," and rechristening the Strait of Hormuz the "Trump Strait."

While those ideas remain proposals, Google Maps did adopt "Gulf of America" and "Lake America" for US users after the names changed in federal records. Users in Mexico and Canada still see the original names for the gulf and lake, respectively. Users in the rest of the world see the original names, followed by Trump's new names in brackets.

The changes have created a dilemma for people who make maps for an international audience. "The issue of international acceptance is also a factor, as some nations may not accept it," Joseph Wright, CEO of Replogle Globes, told Business Insider's Joshua Nelken-Zitser after the lake order.

"We sell globes worldwide."

For now, Trump's Atlantic idea appears to have sunk before it reached Google Maps.

• Elon Musk said he's going to give every child in the US a share of his space company, SpaceX.
• That would amount to $10.7 billion, based on SpaceX's stock price and the 72 million US children.
• Governments and billionaires have previously explored ways to spread corporate ownership.

Christmas came early: Elon Musk wants American children to own stock in his space company, SpaceX, next year.

Musk wrote on X around 1 a.m. Monday that he planned to make the donation next year — "the first of many," he said. SpaceX went public this summer.

Giving one share to each of the estimated 72 million US children would cost roughly $10.7 billion at SpaceX's closing price of $147.92 on Friday. Musk's 4.77 billion SpaceX shares were worth about $706 billion at that price, so the gift would reduce his holdings by about 1.5%.

President Donald Trump said on Truth Social on Monday that the shares would be transferred through Trump Accounts, tax-advantaged investment accounts for eligible American kids launched this summer. Under temporary Treasury rules, donated shares generally cannot be sold for five years.

"This is exactly what was envisioned when we created TRUMP ACCOUNTS," Trump said. "Bringing together the GREAT PRIVATE SECTOR, Elon and so many more, to invest in our children."

The White House said nearly 70 million Trump Accounts have been created. Numerous entities have agreed to contribute, including a $6.25 billion donation from billionaire couple Michael and Susan Dell for children in lower-income zip codes. In July, SpaceX President Gwynne Shotwell and her husband pledged personal SpaceX shares worth at least $321 million, prioritizing lower-income communities.

The White House, Elon Musk, and SpaceX did not immediately respond to a request for comment from Business Insider.

Musk's plan to give away SpaceX stock raises questions about a new kind of billionaire philanthropy: Gifting people shares in a company instead of cash.

Giving millions of children a stake in SpaceX could give them money to use later in life — but the value is tied to a single company's stock. And history shows that efforts to spread corporate ownership can yield uneven results, from big investment returns to stakes being sold for quick cash.

Here are other historical efforts to share wealth or spread corporate ownership among everyday people.

US Sen. Mike Gravel's 1978 share proposal to Alaskans

In 1978, US Sen. Mike Gravel proposed a statewide ownership corporation that would have given Alaskans, including children, stakes in major energy and other business projects. The Trans-Alaska Pipeline System was one potential investment.

The idea was that Alaskans would benefit from an economic boom and any rising asset values. However, the plan never materialized.

Alaska instead developed a dividend system that draws on its preexisting Permanent Fund, a state fund established in 1976 with oil royalties that invests in stocks, bonds, and other assets. It began paying annual cash dividends to eligible Alaskans in 1982.

The Permanent Fund still continues today, with a $1,200 dividend distributed to every eligible Alaskan adult and child who applied in 2026. The initial dividend this year was set at $1,000, but recipients also got an extra $200 energy-relief payment.

Eastern Europe's 1990s mass privatization experiment

Following the collapse of the Soviet Union in 1991, several countries in Central and Eastern Europe used voucher programs to transfer former state-owned companies into the hands of everyday people.

Russia began distributing privatization vouchers to roughly 144 million people in 1992. Russians could use them to buy shares in former state companies, exchange them for shares in investment funds, or sell them for cash.

Czechoslovakia used a similar system, allowing adults to buy low-cost voucher books and use the points to bid on company shares or invest through funds. After Czechoslovakia split in early 1993, the Czech Republic continued its voucher program, while Slovakia canceled its planned second wave of voucher privatization.

Other countries, including Poland, Romania, Bulgaria, and the Baltic states, adopted their own versions of mass privatization.

The programs were designed to rapidly create broad public ownership. But many recipients sold their vouchers for cash amid economic uncertainty, rather than retaining shares.

Evžen Kočenda, a professor at Charles University's Institute of Economic Studies, said that the program was a good idea at the time, given the region's poor economy, but that ultimately, the vouchers were not 'real money,' but rather a financial asset.

Kuwait's 2019 national stock exchange privatization

Kuwait privatized Boursa Kuwait, the operator of its national stock exchange, in 2019, and gave Kuwaitis the opportunity to purchase a stake in the company. The only requirement for registration was that the individual was a Kuwaiti citizen.

Those who participated — about 83,000 of the country's 4.4 million — were initially allocated up to 70 shares each. The initial public offering share price was set at 100 Kuwait fils, roughly $0.33 per share.

Following the privatization, Kuwaiti citizens and private-sector investors together owned roughly 94% of Boursa Kuwait. The Public Institution for Social Security held the remaining 6%.

The Kuwaitis who participated saw a huge return on investment: When Boursa Kuwait debuted on the public market in September 2020, its shares rose more than 10-fold from their 100-fils IPO price, closing at 1,055 fils, or about $3.41.

Today, the privatization is widely regarded as a major success in the investment world, and Boursa Kuwait has described it as the Middle East's only privately owned stock exchange.

• This post appeared in the Business Insider Today newsletter.
• You can sign up for Business Insider's daily newsletter here.

Some pairings feel inevitable. "Friends" had Ross and Rachel. "The Office" had Jim and Pam. Elon Musk has SpaceX and Tesla.

But a deal between Musk's two giant companies could end up looking more like Frankenstein's monster than a Hollywood love story. And investors might struggle to understand and value it.

The SpaceX-Tesla tie-up isn't a shoo-in, but both sides are officially considering it. That raises questions about what's gained from a merger.

Combining the companies turns Musk's two jobs into one. Their somewhat overlapping AI plans could create significant efficiencies in areas like compute and talent. Joe Ciolli, author of the First Trade newsletter, broke down the pros and cons for SpaceX and Tesla investors.

These companies have A LOT under their hoods, though. Here are just some of the businesses or long-term bets that SpaceX and Tesla are pursuing:

• Space-mission services (Falcon 9, Dragon, Starship)
• Internet service (Starlink broadband)
• Mobile carrier (Starlink Mobile)
• Electric vehicles (Model 3, Model Y, Cybertruck, Roadster)
• Government satellite systems (Starshield)
• Autonomous vehicles (Robotaxi)
• Humanoid robots (Optimus)
• Energy storage (Powerwall, Megapack)
• Frontier AI models (Grok)
• Social media (X)
• Payments app (X Money)
• AI infrastructure (Colossus)
• AI coding tools (Cursor)

And don't forget Musk's grandest ambition: colonizing Mars.

A conglomerate with such a diverse set of businesses can become a headache to value.

Let's start simple: How would you describe a SpaceX-Tesla entity?

A space company? An AI company? A robotics company? Saying it's "a little bit of everything" might not sit well with investors.

When a company plays in a bunch of industries, the market doesn't always give it the benefit of the doubt. There's a term for this phenomenon: conglomerate discount.

It means a company's stock is valued lower than the sum of its individual parts. Some investors fear the company will be too complex to manage, or too expensive to run. Others worry its combined financials will make it hard to understand its true health, or stronger parts of the business will subsidize weaker ones.

A widely cited 1995 paper on the topic found the discount to be between 13% and 15% among a sample of diversified companies from 1986 to 1991.

Some academics and economists have argued the conglomerate discount is a relic of the past. A 2024 McKinsey report said the discount wasn't necessarily automatic. Instead, heavily diversified companies often had weak performance or lacked financial transparency, which made it harder to assess their true value.

Either way, these types of companies require investors with a broad appetite. (Or a tough stomach.)

Imagine you're excited about Starlink's potential, but not as keen on humanoid robots. Expensive robotics projects could suck up the budget you were hoping would go to Starlink. Or the money generated by Starlink could subsidize the losses accrued in an underperforming division.

It's why giant, sprawling companies are often less appetizing than a pure-play stock.

Ultimately, a deal is often about selling a vision to investors. And there's arguably no one better at doing that than Elon Musk.

Now he just needs to prove SpaceX and Tesla were always meant to be together.

• After expanding Trump Accounts to all children, the administration may look to adults next.
• We spoke to five experts about what should be in a Trump Account program for adults.
• Accounts should support the millions of Americans who don't have retirement savings, they said.

Trump Accounts, created for children, may be coming to adults, too.

Brad Gerstner, an architect of Trump Accounts, said on Wednesday that the tax-advantaged accounts should be rolled out to every US citizen under 40, though he flagged that Congress would need to pass new legislation to make that happen.

President Trump similarly said on Tuesday that the White House is exploring creating an "alternative" Trump Account for adults.

"We are looking at something different because it really is somewhat of a different thing having to do with adults," Trump said.

So what might that look like? We spoke to five experts about how Trump Accounts could work for adults, who they should be for, and how they could figure into financial planning.

Ray Boshara, a senior policy advisor at the Aspen Institute and Washington University in St. Louis' Center for Social Development, said the accounts could be a boon to the 46% of Americans without money in a retirement account, according to Federal Reserve data.

"I really like the idea of all Americans having a lifelong investment account through which they can build wealth and achieve financial security," said Boshara, who advocated enrolling all American children in Trump Accounts, a change that was rolled out earlier this month.

He sees expanding Trump accounts as an extension of the same push, as long as the accounts are automatically created for those adults, too.

Focus on those without retirement savings

There's a "pretty robust retirement savings system" in place for employees, said Boshara, but nearly half of Americans don't have retirement savings, many because their employer doesn't offer a plan.

Trump Accounts could "fill that huge gap," Boshara said, but unlike the plans for children, it may be worthwhile to focus on those without 401(k) or similar plans.

"One of the benefits of the Trump accounts for kids is that it's universal, but I'm not so sure you'd want it to be universal for an adult," Boshara said. Traditional IRAs already limit tax deductions for some higher earners, and that's a "good thing," he added.

"That way, you're not just giving wealthier Americans yet another tool," Boshara said.

If the goal is to help Americans without retirement, then Boshara's push away from universalism makes sense.

But Cem Karsan, founder of the hedge fund Kai Volatility Advisors, sees this as part of a broader effort to stem the tide of populism by giving regular Americans a greater stake in the stock market.

From that perspective, a universal plan is essential.

"It's essentially the infrastructure that's being laid, the pipes, for delivering ownership broadly to the masses," Karsan said.

For those with retirement accounts, a Trump Account, technically another type of IRA, could allow them to contribute more than the current cap, said Stephanie Link, chief investment strategist at Hightower Advisors.

"There would be an additional layer of tax-deferred wealth accumulation," Link said.

Don't mess with benefits

One of the main concerns with rolling out Trump Accounts to low-income Americans is that they could be kicked off public benefits like food stamps and Supplemental Security Income. This wasn't an issue for children, but many benefits available to adults can be means-tested, and contributing to an account may make you ineligible.

Right now, for traditional IRAs, the rules are a "patchwork," Boshara said. A single person with more than $2,000 in a traditional IRA can lose access to Supplemental Security Income, while Medicaid rules vary from state to state.

"What I'd call for is a categorical disregard," said Boshara, meaning money in the accounts wouldn't count against eligibility for public benefits.

"If you expect low- and moderate-income people to save and build wealth through an IRA, you have to protect their public benefits."

Maybe most importantly, Boshara said these should be a "supplement" for Social Security.

"We never see these as a substitute for Social Security," Boshara said.

Fund them

The most transformative part of the Trump accounts so far has been the $1,000 available to every US citizen born between 2025 and 2028. But Boshara's biggest critique of the program is that families have to open up to receive government payments and employer contributions.

"Opting in is suppressing participation, especially among lower-income families because they don't have the awareness, or they don't interact with the tax system," he said.

He's hoping for Treasury rules that will activate accounts, so contributions can be added automatically, and that the $1,000 funding for newborns be continued indefinitely. And similarly, he's hoping that anyone can put money into adults' funds, like with children.

"The best thing about Trump Accounts for kids is that there are multiple investors in somebody's future," Boshara said. This could even include employer contributions.

"I'm not sure if all employers would contribute, but if they did, it's another savings benefit plan, HSA or 401K type of plan, which is again, more money in their pockets," Link said.

For those who already contribute to their 401(k) and other vehicles, like Roth IRAs, which can be a better fit for early career savers, the outside funding is the big beneficiary, said Christina Taylor, VP of tax development and delivery at tax fintech April.

"For adults saving their own money, a Roth IRA or a 401(k) with an employer match is often still the stronger tool," Taylor said. "Savers should think of a Trump Account as a collector for other people's contributions, not a replacement for retirement accounts they already have."

Treat adults like adults

Current Trump Accounts come with a range of restrictions that keep investors focused on the longer term, including a five-year holding period for individual stocks. That restriction on selling ends when they turn 18, and Boshara said that adults should be able to decide what they want their portfolio to look like.

"You want investor choice," he said. "You want to empower families to make good choices."

Trump Accounts hold only equity investments, so adult versions would require greater diversification.

"A 10-year-old can ride out a bad market, but someone five years from retirement needs some bonds, some cash, and a plan for withdrawals," said Brian Boswell, a wealth manager at Savvy Wealth.

It's a "great idea to make sure all Americans have a lifelong investing account," but the key is to ensure it meets adults' needs, Boshara said.

"Why not extend it and keep the great features of Trump accounts and discard the ones that don't make sense for adults?" Boshara said

• Walmart chief people officer Donna Morris oversees more than 2 million workers globally.
• She shared three green flags that make her lean in during a job interview.
• Morris said she likes to see a track record of grit in a candidate.

Donna Morris oversees over 2 million employees, so she knows a strong candidate when she sees one.

Walmart's chief people officer identified three green flags that make her lean in during a job interview — regardless of the role they're applying for. First, she told Business Insider that she looks for a genuine alignment with the company's purpose and values.

Second, she wants to see an ability to take on multiple responsibilities and make things work.

"They demonstrate a track record of grit," Morris said, defining those individuals as people who have overcome adversity.

In an ideal world, she said that means they've worked on the frontline, since so many of Walmart employees have customer-facing roles. She said the company looks for candidates with a focus on service.

Morris, who started working at 13 at a dry cleaner's and then worked at a drugstore for eight years, said that if a candidate has never experienced what it's like to be a frontline hourly worker, it may be challenging for them to lead. Morris said those jobs gave her purpose, and she found it hard to resign.

Now, when she interviews candidates, Morris said her go-to question is "If I was to ask people who've worked for you before, what will they tell me?" She said the open-ended question generates a genuine response and helps her gauge whether the person is focused on servant leadership, which is a "big green flag."

Asking this question allows her to hear more about a candidate's first job or a work experience. She said that while graduating from an Ivy League school is valuable, she's more focused on hearing about what they've learned from work experience.

"What was the grit they had to persevere through?" Morris asked.

The chief people officer, who worked at Adobe for more than 17 years before joining Walmart, said that her third green flag is candidates who are passionate about making a difference.

"That, to us, would be really, really key," Morris said.

This as-told-to essay is based on a conversation with Bridget Griswold, the 25-year-old CEO of Lean In, who lives in San Francisco. It's been edited for length and clarity.

I fell in love with technology at Brown University, where I studied computer science and business. I worked with two female professors to build a robot. I interned at a semiconductor manufacturing company and also loved design and art.

Product management felt like a really wonderful combination of all those interests, and that was my role at Meta a year after graduating from college. My team and I redesigned the Instagram search grid, so now when you search for large Instagram accounts, you're routed to the search results page rather than directly to those accounts. I'm very proud of that.

While at Meta, an incredible female mentor connected me to Sheryl Sandberg. Meeting her felt so surreal and is what led me to start my role as CEO at Lean In in March. It feels like a once-in-a-lifetime opportunity to do mission-driven work.

I was a swimmer as a kid, and as my swim coach used to say: "You get out of swimming what you put into it." I think that applies to many things in life: The more you put in, the more you get out.

Here's a day in my life.

I wake up to my needy, angelic cat around 7:30 a.m.

The second I wake up, I pet my crying and whining cat. She's an angel but very needy.

I'm not a breakfast person, but I need coffee immediately. I have many cups of coffee throughout the day. One of the first things I do is make some at home.

I always tidy up my apartment while brushing my teeth

The most productive two minutes of my day are when I brush my teeth. I clean and tidy my apartment at the same time.

I'm probably not super focused on brushing my teeth, which is maybe a problem, but I'm also making my bed, emptying the dishwasher, feeding my cat, or starting the coffee maker.

I always move really quickly; I don't like to sit still. Brushing my teeth and standing still would make me antsy, so I like to get something else done at the same time.

I'm still adjusting to West Coast hours

I moved from New York City to San Francisco in August.

In New York, I went to Solidcore classes before work every day. Working on the West Coast, the workday starts earlier than on the East Coast, so I'm still learning whether I like to work out in the morning or after work.

When I take the bus to the office three days a week, I often use that time to catch up on personal housekeeping tasks like scheduling appointments or texting back my friends who live on the East Coast.

I come to the office around 8 a.m. or 8:30 a.m.

A majority of my in-person time is spent in meetings. As CEO, I enjoy being involved in all aspects of the team.

I'll meet with our content and research team — we spend a lot of time digging into data, such as some really exciting new research on trad wives in the manosphere. I also often meet with our product and tech team, as well as many of our partners, to help grow our programs.

We have lunch in the office — my favorite is a salad-plus-smoothie combo — and it's a really wonderful time to connect with the team.

I also love connecting with our Lean In community. One thing we're focused on is closing early gender gaps in AI usage. Our flagship program, Circles, consists of groups of 8 to 12 women who meet regularly to support each other in their careers — we have over 170,000 members. It's a perfect forum to hold each other accountable for upskilling in AI.

Every week, I send AI tips to our network leaders. A recent one encouraged the use of AI notetakers, as women are more likely to take notes during meetings and miss out on participating.

Lean In is in over 180 countries, and it's really heartwarming to see that our commitment to our mission has a positive impact on women's careers. Getting to speak with them is really energizing and rewarding.

I rehearse for meetings by talking to myself on walks

Another habit of mine I've been told is weird is how I prepare for big meetings.

If I have a presentation or interview coming up, I'll set up a Zoom and practice speaking to myself. Talking for a long time is sort of an unnatural act, and the first time you do it is probably not going to be your best.

Sometimes, I'll even go on a walk and wear headphones, pretending like I'm in a meeting or on a phone call, but I'm actually talking to myself and practicing.

When there's a bug, I usually fix the code myself

Because of my background in computer science, I spend a lot of my time finding bugs or things I believe we should change on our platform. I'll code and fix those on my own. Thankfully, with AI, it's so much faster to code now than it was a few years ago.

Our team is busy, and my goal is to enable everyone to have as much impact and move as quickly as possible. If I can help unblock the tech team or resolve an issue rather than add it to their plate, I'm always more than happy to do so.

I leave work around 6 p.m.

I continue to work until I go to bed pretty much every night.

It's nice to have that time at home, when I'm not running around between meetings, to focus, give feedback on documents the team has sent, write, respond to emails, and brainstorm my own ideas.

I take breaks to tidy up my apartment and make dinner. Living in New York got me out of the habit of cooking, so I'm taking the initiative to cook more meals, like rice bowls. I would say about half the time I order takeout, like pho, and the other half I cook, which is progress for me.

If my work doesn't require intense focus, I'll do it from the couch and put a happy TV show on, which right now is "Schitt's Creek." I think it's a nice balance between relaxation and getting things done.

I usually get in bed around 10:30 p.m.

I've been trying to make a habit of reading every night instead of going on my phone, which has been a really positive change. I like anything I read to be a distraction. I'm currently reading "Big Little Lies" and enjoying it.

It's nice to spend 30 minutes reading something like fantasy that's completely different from what I think about at work. That way, I'm not spinning on all the things I need to do or coming up with new ideas that can't get done in my sleep anyway.

Weekends are for the beach and farmers market

My boyfriend works in Los Angeles and flies up to San Francisco every weekend. We've made a tradition of going to the Fort Mason Farmers Market on Sundays for fresh produce to cook an at-home meal that night.

I also enjoy seeing friends over the weekend. My preference is to go on a long walk or go to the beach. I also enjoy fitting in some work — emails, deep-focus work, or reading — throughout the weekend.

• Anthropic platform engineering head Katelyn Lesse said that Claude now writes all her team's code.
• Lesse shared ways that Claude Code has helped the company become more efficient.
• Anthropic nears an initial public offering at a potential $2 trillion valuation.

A top Anthropic engineer says that Claude Code has already wiped out all human coding at one of the AI lab's central teams.

Katelyn Lesse leads the AI startup's platform engineering group, which handles the company's core services, developer tools, and product infrastructure — it's essentially the engine room of Anthropic. Lesse said at Grafana Labs' ObservabilityCON event on Tuesday that among her staff, which tallied 200 as of this summer, the era of human-written code is fully over.

"When it comes to our team and how we're actually building and maintaining our systems, all of our code is written by Claude," Lesse said. "Like, literally all of it."

Anthropic's heavy reliance on Claude Code has helped it remain relatively small, as it approaches an initial public offering that could value it at nearly $2 trillion. The company's revenue growth slowed in the third quarter of this year. Maintaining its lofty valuation may depend on selling more companies on the AI-first approach espoused by Lesse and other Anthropic leaders.

Lesse said that people on her teams are still designing systems and verifications, and then offloading the actual coding to Claude. She said that when the company changed the programming language of a major codebase from Python to Rust, workers developed a way to verify the final product.

"But the grunt work of building the pieces and actually monitoring the pieces and actually making sure that we felt good about it, that was agents all the way down," Lesse said.

Lesse said Anthropic already lets agents fix tests autonomously, with no human interaction, and it's thinking about how staff can get comfortable with agents autonomously making changes to the actual codebase, given the improvements in AI models over the last year.

"As engineering leaders, we're like terrified, and we're like, let's be really careful about this, but I think the line is starting to push," Lesse said.

Anthropic has also embraced Claude Code companywide. It released a report last week saying that as AI agents have worked more inside the company, it has hired for a smaller share of junior technical positions. And in May, Anthropic said that Claude then wrote more than 80% of the entire company's production code.

Have a tip? Contact this reporter via email at scouncil@businessinsider.com, or over text, Signal, Telegram, or WhatsApp at 415-757-8198. Use a personal email address, a non-work WiFi network, and a non-work device; here's our guide to sharing information securely.

• A sign instructing San Francisco gym-goers not to vibe code between sets went viral.
• The sign was an "AI-generated fake," according to the gym.
• Amid tech's vibe-coding obsession and fitness boom, it's no surprise the image has gotten heat.

Don't hog the leg press while prompting Claude.

A screen with the logo of Fitness SF, a Bay Area chain of gyms, went viral among techies on X and Instagram on Monday. The image instructed gym-goers to refrain from writing code or prompting AI during their workouts. "Be present. Lift harder. Ship later," the image reads.

Troy Macfarland, Fitness SF's director of marketing, said, however, that the image was an "AI-generated fake." The gym does have etiquette signs that mention phone usage and being courteous, he wrote, but none mention vibe coding.

"This person altered our actual images displayed on the screen," Macfarland wrote. "I will give an 'A' for creativity to him."

It's not clear whether the image was generated with AI, Photoshop, or some other tool. Ian Brash, whose post with the image got almost 7,000 likes, did not respond to a request for comment.

In San Francisco's AI mania, it's no surprise a sign like that blew up on X. Techies weighed in, cracking their own jokes about how tied they were to their coding agents.

One X user told Fitness SF to give their copywriter a raise. A Cognition engineer said that vibe coding between sets was encouraged at his company's gym.

"Vibe coding at the gym?" one X user wrote. "You're worried about the wrong weights."

One reaction image often appears in the comment sections of posts like this one. It shows a muscled man, holding a giant nuclear bomb in his hands, jumping into the city of San Francisco. One VC posted it with the message: "Even I have limits."

Claude Code and cardio

The sign tapped into two of the buzziest subcultures in tech.

First, there's AI coding. Ever since the launch of Claude Code and OpenAI's Codex, engineers have been tied to their phones (or walking around with half-open laptops) to continue building. Some techies told Business Insider that their love of vibe coding created distance between them and their girlfriends.

Then there's the gym. Tech bros are getting fit, pumping themselves full of peptides and getting shredded at early-morning Equinox sessions. A developer at the gym used to be an anomaly; now, it's the norm.

Some techies seemed skeptical from the start. One X user quoted the post, writing that there was "no way this is real."

Another user responded that they didn't know about that specific sign, but they did know about the underlying issue. "This is a real problem at the Equinox in San Francisco," they wrote.

• One of Meta's AI researchers left the company this month to start a legal tech company.
• Ethem Coban worked on teaching Meta's language models to reason through legal questions.
• Since then, he's had talks to raise $6 million in funding for a startup, according to a person familiar.

The legal industry's artificial intelligence gold rush is luring talent from Silicon Valley's biggest labs.

Ethem Coban, a researcher at Meta, left the company earlier this month to launch a legal tech startup, according to a person familiar with the matter. Coban, who worked on teaching Meta's language models to reason through legal questions, has been in talks to raise $6 million at a $25 million valuation.

Talks are still early, and the terms of the deal could change.

The startup is the latest entrant in an increasingly crowded legal tech market. Long seen as laggards, lawyers have spent the past two years experimenting with tools built on large language models. Early movers like Harvey and Legora saw a crush of demand, setting off a wave of investment in startups promising to transform how lawyers work.

Now, that opportunity is attracting researchers from the companies building the underlying models.

Coban spent almost two years at Meta, most recently at its Superintelligence Labs, where he helped train models to give better answers to legal questions and reduce hallucinations, the person said. He previously studied law at American University and Goethe University in Frankfurt.

A spokesperson for Meta didn't respond to a request for comment.

Coban has told investors that his new company aims to help law firms and corporate legal teams build and customize models around their expertise. The bet is that companies will increasingly want to own their AI rather than license it from outside companies, because it gives them more control over their data.

Law firms also see a chance to turn mountains of case files into a competitive advantage that other firms can't simply buy off the shelf. Kirkland & Ellis, the industry's revenue leader, has committed $500 million to building proprietary software. Latham & Watkins has been buying its own Nvidia servers to customize models in-house.

For Coban, the challenge won't be convincing law firms that they need artificial intelligence. It will be persuading them that someone who knows how the models work from the inside is best suited to build them.

• Newcomers like Kevin O'Leary face skepticism due to a lack of experience in data center development.
• Bernstein analysts dubbed O'Leary and others "bragawatts."
• Most announced projects will never happen. "Press releases are cheap…concrete is not."

The AI industry has a problem with bragging.

Companies are announcing enormous new data centers to power the AI boom. Some promise facilities bigger than anything the industry has built before.

There's just one problem: Most of these projects may never happen.

Bernstein Research analyzed thousands of planned US data centers and concluded that only about 35% of the announced capacity is likely to get built. That's roughly 170 gigawatts of data center capacity out of a total of almost 500 gigawatts.

The rest? A significant chunk of it belongs to a category the industry has a wonderfully dismissive name for: "Bragawatts." These are ambitious announcements, often from newcomers with little experience building data centers, that have a slim chance of becoming reality.

"Press releases are cheap…concrete is not," Bernstein analysts wrote in a research note.

Bernstein began its analysis with more than 7,000 data center projects across North America, drawing on information from Aterio, a company that tracks construction through satellite imagery, permits, and other records. The analysts narrowed that to more than 5,000 projects (partly by excluding those already canceled).

Then they assessed the chances of these remaining projects being completed. The analysts considered factors such as whether construction had started, whether electricity was available, and whether the companies involved had successfully built data centers before.

The results revealed a striking divide.

The 'bragawatt brigade'

Experienced operators including Amazon, Google, Microsoft, and Meta landed at the top. Bernstein gave these companies perfect scores of 5 out of 5 for their development credentials. Other data center specialists, such as Digital Realty, Equinix, and CoreSite, got top marks, too.

O'Leary Digital, associated with celebrity investor Kevin O'Leary, ended up at the bottom, with a credibility score of 0.35 out of 5, according to Bernstein. His company has announced 15 gigawatts of data center projects, and Bernstein estimates that only 489 megawatts, or about 3%, will actually materialize.

"Sorry, Kevin," the analysts wrote.

Although the term "bragawatts" has been doing the rounds in the data center industry lately, it's unclear who coined it, Bernstein analyst Madison Rezaei told me.

"I wish I could take credit for that," she said. "I believe I originally heard it from an Equinix executive, but I don't think he owned it either."

She said that while some ambitious newcomers could succeed, they haven't yet demonstrated they can deliver.

"It's not that all of these guys are sort of terrible and not going to deliver, but we just have lower confidence because we don't know them," Rezaei said.

O'Leary Digital responds

O'Leary Digital disputed Bernstein's assessment, saying the research doesn't account for substantial work that occurs before construction begins.

While acknowledging that O'Leary Digital is a young company, CEO Paul Palandjian said the team has decades of experience building major infrastructure projects and that its proposed 15 gigawatts of capacity would be built in stages over several years.

The company said it has secured binding agreements covering about 11,000 acres in Utah and 13,000 acres in Alberta, obtained a 30-year development agreement in Utah, and made progress on planning, engineering, and permits at both sites. It also said the projects would generate their own electricity.

The company said its early development work is funded, additional capital is committed to reaching key milestones, and experienced engineering and construction partners are involved.

"We would rather be judged on milestones than on a model," Palandjian said.

'An announcement in search of a project'

Other low scorers in the "bragawatt" brigade included Vermaland and Joule Capital Partners, according to Bernstein analysis based on Aterio data.

Joule has announced 50 data center projects with a combined capacity of 11.7 gigawatts. Bernstein estimates that only about 11% of that capacity will actually get built. Almost all of Joule's planned capacity remains at the announcement stage, with little evidence of construction progress or of major customers committing to use the facilities, Bernstein wrote in a July note to investors.

The analysts gave Joule a credibility score of 2.05 out of 5, placing it among the lowest-ranked developers in its database.

"An announcement in search of a project," the analysts wrote.

Vermaland has announced plans for a massive data center project in Arizona. Bernstein estimates that only 4% of its proposed 2.2 gigawatts of capacity will get built. The company is primarily a landowner, not a data center developer. Its proposed $33 billion La Osa project near Eloy had already been sharply scaled back amid local opposition and without construction approval. In late August, regulators formally rejected the project. Even before that, the analysts gave Vermaland a credibility score of 0.75 out of 5.

Joule and Vermaland didn't respond to emails seeking comment this week.

A yawning gap for data centers

Sergio Toro, CEO of Aterio, sees similar patterns in his firm's voluminous, detailed data.

Aterio's tracking shows that roughly 30 to 40 gigawatts of new data center capacity get announced each month. Yet only about 7 gigawatts begin construction each month, while 2 to 3 gigawatts actually start operating.

This leaves a yawning gap.

Many announced projects get withdrawn before construction begins — and before real money has been spent.

"They just make the announcement, but they didn't get their approvals. Or they make multiple filings in multiple locations to see which one gets selected," Toro told me. "That's why we track with satellite if there's real movement on the ground or not."

Indeed, Bernstein analysts wrote recently that the amount of "stranded" data center capacity has surged. These are projects that are either canceled, delayed, or not approved.

The AI boom's three tiers

Toro sees three broad groups competing to build AI infrastructure.

At the top are the established technology giants, including Amazon, Microsoft, and Google. They've built data centers for decades and generally deliver on their commitments. Most of their projects will get done, he said.

In the middle are "neoclouds," newer companies such as CoreWeave that rent out computing power specifically for AI. Although they're more vulnerable to financing problems and delays, many are making solid progress, especially because some of these players already have access to electricity.

"We see them advancing quite well," Toro said. "Sometimes we see some delays, but it's not something significant or any kind of big capacity that is at risk."

Then come the newcomers making extraordinary promises. That's where most delays and cancellations happen, Toro said.

Even Amazon needs a backup plan

Not every project that disappears was a fantasy, though. Even a top player like Amazon struggles sometimes to secure electricity and other supplies on time for these huge projects.

Business Insider's Eugene Kim reported exclusively this week on the challenges Amazon faces with its record AI buildout.

The biggest, most experienced tech companies deliberately pursue more potential data center capacity than they need because they know some developments will fail or get delayed.

Major AI companies were committing to three or four times the space and electricity they needed over the following two years, Jeffrey Moerdler, a data center lawyer, estimated during an interview with Bernstein analysts.

His reasoning: Of data center projects that haven't started construction, roughly a third will arrive on schedule, another third will be delayed, and the remainder won't happen.

Rezaei and Toro estimate that the top players don't over-commit that much — more like double the capacity they need at most.

The strategy provides a "Plan B," as Toro put it, in case of delays involving electricity, equipment, permits, local opposition, or other factors.

Texas has a ghost problem

This helps explain another extraordinary number.

Data center companies have requested connections for roughly 450 gigawatts of electricity demand on Texas' main power grid, more than five times the grid's roughly 85 gigawatts of existing capacity, according to Toro and others. 

Many of those requests are placeholders rather than firm construction plans. Toro calls them "ghost projects."

These speculative projects clog the waiting lists for electricity connections, making the electricity shortage look a lot worse than it actually is.

"Developers routinely spam projects across several sites, and many are speculative builds with no customer yet," Ryan McEntush, a partner at venture capital firm Andreessen Horowitz, wrote in a recent blog. "Often these new developers have never even plugged in a GPU, let alone a power plant."

Texas has paused applications to review and weed out projects that aren't serious. Toro, from Aterio, expects this to favor the established players at the expense of the bragawatts.

The real AI boom

None of this means the AI infrastructure boom is imaginary.

Aterio tracks thousands of buildings, including major projects already under construction. Bernstein estimates that nearly 80% of the capacity the largest technology companies are directly developing is credible.

And when speculative projects disappear, Rezaei doesn't expect a wave of unpaid debt. Many will fail before building begins, the stage when developers borrow serious money through project financing.

Some of those missing data centers were never really coming in the first place.

Sign up for the AI Insider newsletter here. Reach out to me via email at abarr@businessinsider.com

• Gen Zers are much less likely to have at least one kid than older generations at the same age.
• Not wanting kids, affordability problems, and medical challenges are plausible reasons.
• Having at least three kids is becoming less common across income percentiles, except in the top 1%.

Birth rates in the US have been falling for decades, but there's been an especially large drop in the likelihood of Gen Zers in their 20s having a kid compared with their older peers at the same age.

For 26-year-old Gen Zers, the likelihood of having at least one kid was 26%, down from 47% for millennials, 50% for Gen X, and 46% for boomers at that age. There were also differences between Gen Z and older generations in the probability of wanting another kid.

That's based on an analysis by a group of researchers published by the Federal Reserve Bank of Atlanta. Julie Hotchkiss, a research economist at the Atlanta Fed, told Business Insider the analysis controls for education, partnership status, and some health conditions. The analysis uses National Survey of Family Growth data up to 2023.

From affordability challenges to concerns about the future, there are several likely reasons behind the lower probabilities. Hotchkiss said that a lower desire to have kids is one explanation.

Gen Zer Brooklen Farley said in an as-told-to Business Insider essay in 2023 that she decided during college she didn't want to have kids. Farley is worried about issues like the economy and climate crisis.

"Many people call us Zoomers, but honestly, a lot of us are doomers: We feel pessimistic about the future and don't want to subject our children to it," she said.

The research also notes that there's been a rise in medical challenges related to having kids. The researchers looked at impaired fecundity, or trouble becoming pregnant or carrying to term. The average probability of impaired fecundity at 26 was 18% for Gen Z compared to 10% for boomers at that age. The probabilities are higher for older ages — the likelihood for 40-year-old millennials was about 30%, higher than the 26% for Gen Xers at that age.

"If we want to talk about birth rates, we can't just talk about preferences," Hotchkiss said. "It's not just that darned younger generation not wanting, just being selfish and not wanting to have children. There's also really a very real medical issue that needs to be addressed."

Another problem is all the financial costs that come with being a parent. LendingTree found the cost of raising a kid for over 18 years adds up to $303,418 after tax exemptions and credits, or about $17,000 a year.

Affordability issues aren't just a Gen Z problem. Surrounded by a large family growing up, millennial Lizzie Lawson said in a Business Insider essay that she assumed she would also have a large family one day.

"When I was a kid in the early 2000s, my dad was an electrician and sole provider for our growing family of eight," Lawson said in a Business Insider essay, adding that her family got by with the help of coupon cutting and hand-me-downs. "Money was tight, but we also owned a house in a safe suburb, and my parents sent six kids to Catholic school from K-8."

Lawson, a college instructor whose husband is a physical therapist with $100,000 in student loans, said the economy is different from the one she grew up in.

"We can't afford to have one of us stay at home, and there aren't enough coupons in the world to cover the rising cost of day care," she said.

Having large families is rarer than in the past

Michael Konczal, vice president of policy and research at the Economic Security Project, said in his newsletter that across income percentiles, families with at least three kids have become less common since the 90s, except at the top 1%.

"A third kid isn't new for them; what's new is that it has become rarer for everyone else," he said. "Compared with the 1990s, families with three or more kids became less common overall and among the rest of the top 10%. The top 1%'s estimated share barely changed, though the uncertainty is substantial. Maybe all the stresses that made childbearing more difficult over the past 30 years just bounced right off the 1%?"

The US fertility rate has cooled to 1.6 births per woman, below the 2.1 replacement rate, which Hotchkiss said would translate to slower population growth. The Congressional Budget Office projects that just a few years from now, the number of births in the US could fall below the number of deaths, which could have implications in future decades.

"Over time, the negative net contribution of births and deaths increasingly offsets the positive contribution of net immigration, until population growth slows to zero in 2056. The population is projected to shrink thereafter," the CBO said.