When building a startup, there is a real balancing act between managing expectations, educating on whats possible, and identifying the true cost of innovation. CTOs are challenged not only to build functional technology platforms quickly, but to do so as cost effectively as possible.Startups are often not profitable therefore dont have a lot of cash to burn, meaning the CTO has to deliver technology solutions to solve their business goals on a limited budget.Lets look at a legacy industry like commercial insurance - its been undergoing a transformation in recent years. The industry is data and human heavy and is heavily regulated which is why its ripe for innovation. It is also playing catch-up to address the needs of many consumers who want a seamless user experience and businesses that want a modern experience - faster, streamlined, digitised, and so on - when dealing with insurance providers. This is particularly true of the on-demand economy.The on-demand economy is characterised by the likes of Taskrabbit, Doordash, Uber, Deliveroo and Amazon Flex. But its the likes of hard working on-demand taxi and delivery drivers who are calling for flexible insurance that caters to their very specific needs which enables them to buy comprehensive coverage for when theyre driving, and to switch it off when theyre not.However, many insurtechs have not adequately met these needs despite their ability to leverage technology more nimbly and effectively than traditional players. The business of insurance is complicated and innovation cannot be retrofitted with existing tech, which is why its vital to have a deep understanding of what the requirements are between the customer, the insurance partners and platforms like Uber and Amazon, for instance.Transforming the on-demand insurance industry is a symbiotic relationship between the customer, the insurance provider and the platform. Although it can deliver real results for all, it also comes with its share of unique challenges.Loss ratio - how much an insurance company spends on claims compared to the premiums it receives is a key indicator of profitability. When insurtech startups focus too much on showy AI-driven gimmicks such as automatic claims payments within seconds, loss ratios suffer and crucial insurance industry partners back away quickly. In the world of insurance, innovation at all costs simply doesnt work.But technology cannot simply operate as a cost centre. By working in partnership with the rest of the business, startup CTOs and their teams need to focus on building an ongoing technology foundation to drive innovation within legacy industry structures and processes, driving business growth as well as consistent results for customers and partners.Many of the challenges CTOs face arent necessarily about technology, but the change of mindset required when implementing tech solutions. Until very recently, insurance was an industry dominated by traditional players, governed by outdated systems and processes. While this is changing, there are still areas where bridges must be built between the promise of what technology can deliver and a certain this is how its always been done mindset.For example, we know that insurance, like many industries, is ripe for reinvention through smart uses of AI as long as it is implemented in the most appropriate areas of the business, and used as an augmented assistant rather than a replacement for specialist expertise.Many of the challenges CTOs face arent necessarily about technology, but the change of mindset required when implementing tech solutionsChris Gray, InshurAt Inshur, working in combination with a team from Google Cloud, we were able to build an AI assistant for our claims team and demonstrate to management its effectiveness in helping the team prioritise work as well as speeding up administrative tasks, while providing fast and effective customer service. Were continuing to roll out this technology internationally, as well as add further features to augment the human adjusters and utilise their expertise while saving them time.The assistant helps the team to quickly scan incoming documents, including email, physical letters, attachments or transcribed phone calls; infer the data, including who is the sender and the intention of the communication; identify important and useful information such as vehicle registration and claimant name; identify the priority and urgency of the claim; assign it to the right team; and summarise the data into a standard format for ease of use. By automatically accepting feedback, retraining, and learning from past actions, the assistant also helps guide handlers with proposed next steps, helping to train new claims handlers.The AI-based tools we built to support our claims teams have enabled us to see patterns that are also a good fit for other departments within the business. So much so, that we see potential for the commoditisation of these approaches to a wider set of solutions that serves not just insurance, but any business.Another question a lot of startup CTOs are asked is whether to build or buy. Building tech solutions from scratch can carry significant risk, especially given the resource investment typically required. But when every business in a given market is using the same platforms usually with significant tweaks and workarounds to fit their specific needs then nobody can truly win the innovation race.First-movers must always be willing to build when necessary, and to buy when prudent.For example, we decided that we needed to invest in developing our own solutions to problems that could not be adequately solved by off-the-shelf products. One such product is our Pay-as-you-flex wallet for Amazon Flex. While traditional insurance has historically covered drivers at all times, including when theyre not driving, we knew that technology held the key to delivering a new insurance product that would enable delivery drivers to pay only for the cover they needed, when they needed it.As the first-of-its-kind to enter the market, we knew that wed need to build it from scratch.Its only since we built our proprietary platform to manage business-critical processes including policy administration, claims management and billing that similar products have entered the market. By building a platform thats fully tailored to the specific needs of the market we serve, weve paved the way for other insurers to do the same for their customers and partners.However, the startup CTO must also take the lead in conversations where buying makes most sense, securing buy-in from other senior stakeholders and identifying the most appropriate vendors to partner with. Often, particularly in a high-growth startup where cost and return on investment are key considerations, this will involve a detailed assessment of risk for all available scenarios.In Inshurs case, were working with Google Cloud to implement several of its AI products to drive efficiencies and ensure that customers are treated fairly which is both a regulatory and moral imperative in the insurance industry.We know that our customers drive for a living, which means they often need to call us via their hands-free mobile technology while driving in between journeys, rather than emailing or speaking to a text-based chatbot.When we identified that a significant proportion of the calls coming into our customer service team could be quickly and effectively answered by an AI-driven solution, we implemented a smart virtual agent to handle more straightforward queries, enabling the team to focus more on serving customers with specific or detailed questions.Because of the crucial role technology such as AI will play in the coming years, CTOs will need to ensure they are consistently developing deep understanding and expertise, not just in the latest technology innovations but also how they can be implemented to drive business strategy and growth.Crucially, this will include taking a leadership role in helping to educate stakeholders across the business on the best use cases for AI tools and other solutions, building understanding at every level around what the technology can and cant help with, and putting clear structure and process around innovation.This ability to bridge the gap between the business and technology is already becoming a crucial indicator of future success.Chris Gray is chief technology officer at vehicle insurance provider Inshur.Read more about balancing business needs and innovationWhy AI will push enterprises to eliminate the silos that slow innovation - Generative AI offers a way to transform developer productivity, by expediting a cultural shift in the way enterprises organise themselves.Nordic innovators drive the evolution of engagement - Nothing is off limits for digitisation in the Nordic region, with startups applying their skills to even the most unexpected lifestyle and business challenges.AI innovation key to UK business, but obstacles threaten progress - AI is seen by IT leaders as essential, but it requires innovation, skills and infrastructure all of which are under pressure from day-to-day firefighting, energy costs and cyber threats.

A DEI powered AI could "decide that theres too many men in power and execute them," Elon Musk said ... [+] last week. But is Musk's DEI fear really about something else? (Photo by FREDERIC J. BROWN)AFP via Getty ImagesCan AI take over the world? is one of the most frequently asked questions about AI. But is it really about AI? Or is it about a primal fear that we rarely talk about?If hypothetically, AI is designed for DEI, you know, diversity at all costs, it could decide that theres too many men in power and execute them, Elon Musk said via a videocall to the World Governments Summit in Dubai last week.DUBAI, UAE - FEBRUARY 13, 2025: Elon Musk makes a speech via video-conference during the World ... [+] Government Summit 2025 in Dubai, United Arab Emirates. (Photo by Waleed Zein)Anadolu via Getty ImagesThis may sound like the paranoia of a single powerful man. But what if Musks DEI fears hold a truth about us all? What if we dont ask, Can AI take over the world? because we fear AI, but because we fear the chaos of no one being in control?Fear Of Nature: How Do We Control The Chaos?When I talked to media theorist Douglas Rushkoff about his recently republished book, Program Or Be Programmed, he described technology as "an extension of the male, white, colonial fear of women, fear of nature, fear of the moon, emotions and darkness.According to Rushkoff, the question that drives people like Musk is: How do we control the chaos? They want to prevent the patterns of natural, cyclical, and emotional darkness from happening. And thats what they have in mind when they build technology: "This idea of controlling nature. Of dominating it.When Musk says that a DEI-powered AI might decide to execute powerful men, its easy to focus on the male, white, colonial fear of women part of Rushkoffs analysis. But frequently asked questions like Can AI take over the world?, Can AI become self-aware? and Can AI detectors be wrong? suggest that men in power are not the only ones whose relationship with technology is driven by fear.Can AI Take Over The World? Is As Revealing As DreamsWhile the questions we ask to AI have become a focal point in research and education in 2023, prompting was even nominated to be the Oxford Word of the Year we rarely pay attention to the questions we ask about AI.But studying the questions we ask and dont ask about technology can help us better understand not only AI, but also ourselves.In his 1955 article, Man, A Questioning Being, the German-American neurologist Erwin W. Straus wrote that questions are as revealing as dreams, or even more so. And just as dreams reveal more about the dreamer than the course of the dream, questions reveal more about who is asking them than about what they are about.So, what do the questions we ask about AI tell us about ourselves?Can AI Take Over The World? Calls For New QuestionsIn a previous Forbes article, I share DeepMind Professor Neil Lawrences observation that we humans make a lot of shortcuts when trying to understand and communicate with our surroundings. One of them is to anthropomorphize, which means that we think of all other intelligent entities as human projecting our own intelligence onto them and assuming they have the same motivations as us.A question like Can AI take over the world? is a good example of Lawrences point. And it shows how strong the assumption is that there is someone or something that must be in control. If not Elon Musk or another man in power, then a DEI-designed AI. The idea that the world cannot and should not be controlled is simply not an option.But what if we asked a different kind of question? What if instead of asking, Can AI take over the world? we asked: Why do we think of the world as something to be controlled? Where does the need for someone or something to be in power come from? And who would benefit if we let go of our fear of chaos and embraced that which cannot be taken over? Not by AI. Not by Elon Musk. Not by anything or anyone in power.The Answer To Can AI Take Over The world?The answer is no: AI cannot take over the world. There will always be nature, emotions, and darkness that are beyond the control of technology and the people who build technology. But like all other technology, AI can take over the way we think and talk about the world. And to avoid that, we must focus less on the DEI fears of powerful men, and more on the fear that prevents us all from asking powerful questions.Or as Rushkoff puts it: "Only the person who is aware of the programming is capable of questioning why its programmed that way. And then choosing whether or not to submit to that program. Reframing Can AI take over the world? to questions about why we ask the questions about AI that we do is a good place to start building that awareness.For more videos with Douglas Rushkoff, Neil Lawrence and Nick Bostrom, check out my Big Questions for Big Thinkers series on YouTube. And if you have questions, like Can AI take over the world?, you would like me to explore, please let me know.

The U.S. used electric vehicle market is experiencing an evolution driven by the increasing availability of vehicles, shifts in consumer behavior, and the ongoing maturing of the transportation electrification ecosystem. Following a steady climb in late 2024, the volume of used EVs has already reached an all-time high.Thats the view from Recurrent Autos Q1 2025 Used Electric Car Prices & Market Report, which offers a comprehensive look into used EV trends, highlighting the shifts in market dynamics, consumer preferences, and lingering adoption barriers. From the report, its clear used EVs are accelerating in adoption, driven by key factors like the growing variety of EVs available in the marketplace and the ongoing surge of lease returns. So, whats in store for this year?More people are buying used EVs than ever before.gettyRising Popularity of Used EVs: A Growing, Diverse MarketThe sheer variety of used EVs entering the market is among the most compelling findings from Recurrents report. A few years ago, Tesla was the dominant player, but today, that landscape is shiftingmajor brands like Ford, Chevrolet, Hyundai, and Nissan are emerging with a growing presence and offering a range of vehicle types to meet diverse consumer needs.One of the biggest trends were seeing is that used EV shoppers now have options, said Liz Najman, Director of Market Insights at Recurrent. Consumers are no longer restricted to a single make or model when looking for a used EV. Instead, the broader selection they have to choose from is helping increase overall adoption and interest in the market.Among the most sought-after models, the 2023 Nissan Ariya stands out, receiving accolades as the Best Used EV of 2025. With up to 300 miles of range and a technology-forward design, the Ariya is setting a high standard for what buyers expect from an EV, whether pre-owned or new.States across the U.S. are also seeing a rapid rise in used EV adoption. California remains the epicenter of EV adoption, but states like Texas and Florida are now major players, with the three states collectively representing 45% of the used EV market. New York, Illinois, Georgia, Oregon, and Washington follow closely behind, signaling that the appeal of used EVs is spreading well beyond traditional EV strongholds.Barriers to Adoption: Navigating the RoadblocksDespite the impressive growth of the used EV market, several key barriers that prevent broader adoption remain. Battery life is top-of-mind for many, making potential buyers wary of the long-term viability of used EVs.A counterpoint to confront any myths about battery longevity is that we have not yet seen widespread battery degradation and failure, said Najman. The EV batteries were tracking today are lasting even longer than most experts expected.To date, only 2.5% of EV batteries have been replaced, with less than 1% of vehicles from model year 2016 and newer needing replacement. Well-maintained, used EVs offer a promising lifespanputting to rest many concerns about battery degradation.Also, the lack of consumer awareness about how to buy a used EV poses a challenge. Many still lack confidence in navigating the used EV market, especially when it comes to understanding factors like battery health, electric range, and potential incentives. Education, transparency, and reliable data will be crucial to help build consumer confidence moving forward.The Used EV Markets Road AheadAs more EVs make their way into the used car market through organic pathways like lease returns and trade-ins, the supply of affordable EVs will continue to grow in 2025. Its worth noting that the pre-owned market is quite predictable and less impacted by changes in policy or production compared to new car sales. Recurrent predicts that more than 100,000 leased EVs will funnel into the used car market in 2025, with that number jumping to 650,000 by 2027. With prices for used EVs remaining attractive, particularly as 57% of used EVs are priced under $30,000, there is a unique opportunity for consumers to get into an EV at a fraction of the cost of a new one.Now is the time, Najman advises. For those considering switching to an EV, theres no better time to take the plunge. The key to the future success of the used EV market will be consumer education and continued improvements in battery technology. As awareness grows, more buyers will recognize the long-term value and sustainability these vehicles offer.

What just happened? In what should come as little surprise, other than the fact that it managed to last this long, Humane is shutting down its Ai Pin business. Most of the company is being acquired by HP for $116 million, but as its new owner doesn't want the Ai Pin, the devices will be essentially bricked on February 28 and a lot of owners won't be receiving refunds. HP's $116 million acquisition of Humane includes the AI firm's CosmOS platform, IP portfolio that covers more than 300 patents and patent applications, and some of its employees.Something that isn't part of the deal is the Ai Pin business, which HP has wisely said "thanks, but no thanks" to. It means the segment is being shut down along with all the devices, which have now been discontinued from sale.On February 28 at 12pm PST, Ai Pins' cellular functions will cease and they will no longer connect to Humane's servers. This means AI queries/responses, calls, texts, and data usage will no longer be possible. The battery level will still work, which should be of great consolation to owners.One might imagine that those who spent $700 on an Ai Pin will be getting their money back. In more bad news for anyone who made such a mistake, the only buyers receiving refunds are those who bought an Ai Pin in the last 90 days only those Ai Pins that shipped on or after November 15, 2024, are eligible.Refunds must be submitted by February 27, 2025. Anyone with a $24 monthly subscription that continues past February 28 will receive a prorated refund. // Related StoriesIn June 2024, Humane recalled its Ai Pin charging case over potential fire risks. Those still waiting for a replacement will "automatically receive a refund for the portion of your original purchase price that was allocated to the Charge Case after February 28, 2025."The Ai Pin, a square device that can be attached to clothing, features a camera, microphone, a touch pad, and a laser projector that displays the GUI on a user's hand. It can also make calls and send messages. As the name suggests, the main draw was supposed to be its AI smarts that enabled it to answer questions and act as an assistant.There was a lot of hype surrounding the device before launch the startup hoped the Ai Pin would eventually replace smartphones but it arrived to scathing reviews, with Marques Brownlee calling it the worst product he's ever reviewed. The $700 price and $24 subscription certainly didn't help.A few months later, it was reported that Humane was looking to sell the company for a hugely ambitious $1 billion, or around 90% more than what HP just paid. Following the charging case recall, it was reported that more people were returning the Ai Pin than buying it.The fact that HP, a company long criticized for its printer ink cartridge DRM, bought Humane hasn't been missed by the public. Will we soon see AI in OfficeJet Printers?

Table of ContentsTable of ContentsiPhone SE 4: possible release date and priceWill the iPhone SE 4 actually be the iPhone 16E?iPhone SE 4: designiPhone SE 4: displayiPhone SE 4: specsiPhone SE 4: camerasiPhone SE 4: battery lifeThe iPhone SE 4 launch is almost certainly happening today, February 19. Last week Apple CEO, Tim Cook, teased that wed see a new member of the family today, and the wave of rumors and leaks over the past months point towards the new iPhone SE being the device in line for a reveal.While the spotlight always seems to be on Apples mainline iPhones, the iPhone SE is a great pick for those who are on a budget. If you want an iPhone that doesnt break the bank, the SE is the way to go.Recommended VideosThe original iPhone SE came out in 2016, and then Apple revamped it in 2020 and 2022 by giving it some more modern hardware. The iPhone SE tends to get updated every two or so years rather than annually like the traditional iPhone. This means that we should see a new iPhone SE 4 in 2025.Please enable Javascript to view this contentHeres everything we know so far about the iPhone SE 4.Andy Boxall / Digital TrendsApple CEO, Tim Cook, has teased that a new member of the family will land on February 19. Outlets such as Bloomberg have hinted that the February launch event is most likely about the fourth-gen iPhone SE, which also aligns with previous rumors and analyst predictions.Pre-orders should go live soon after the official announcement, and given Apples history with shipment gaps for new products, late February or early March should see public sales. As far as pricing goes, the analyst and industry watcher consensus seems to agree on a $450-500 starting price.When the iPhone SE first came out in 2016, it seemed like a one-and-done deal. We did not see another iPhone SE until 2020, and then we got a third iteration in 2022. Based on that, 2025 is a good time for a refresh.Apple announced the iPhone SE 3 in March 2022, so a March 2025 release would be almost three years to the day, depending on the actual release date. Despite featuring numerous upgrades, the iPhone SE 4 isnt expected to cost more than $500.The current iPhone SE starts at $429, so the next generation will likely fall around that same price but with a potential increase. Even if the iPhone SE 4s price increases slightly, it will still be comfortably lower than the mainline iPhone 16.To date, the majority of rumors surrounding Apples next SE smartphone suggest it will be called the iPhone SE 4th generation (iPhone SE 4 for short).However, there have been a couple of tipsters claiming Apple will bring the new devices name in line with its current range of handsets. If this rings true, we may be about to welcome in the iPhone 16E.The 16E moniker would make sense as Cook refers to a new member of the family in his teaser tweet, and this could be a direct nod to the fact the new phone will be part of the iPhone 16 family. Well find out for sure later today.Leak-based iPhone SE 4 mockups. Majin BuIt seems the iPhone SE 4 will be a familiar aesthetic affair. A accessory brand recently listed alleged product renders of the upcoming phone, revealing a design modeled after the iPhone 14. The only major difference is the imaging hardware at the back.Apples next budget-focused phone will reportedly come equipped with a single rear camera, and will ditch the physical Touch ID button in favor of Face ID. There are a few other purported CAD-based renders floating around social media platforms, which also back up the single rear camera theory and a modern design makeover.SpigenThe original iPhone SE in 2016 was modeled after the iPhone 5s, and the iPhone SE 2 and iPhone SE 3 had the same design as the iPhone 8. However, a potential iPhone SE 4 seems ripe for a change in chassis design.Rumors have indicated that the iPhone SE 4 will feature a 6.1-inch display, similar to what Apple currently offers on the mainline iPhones. That makes the new iPhone SE 4 much larger than the current 4.7-inch display on the 2022 model.Going with a 6.1-inch design will also eliminate the home button for Touch ID, bringing the iPhone SE in line with the other models with Face ID.However, its unlikely that we will see the Dynamic Island, as the notch will almost certainly return.The iPhone SE 4 may also get an Action button, which initially debuted on the iPhone 15 Pro and replaces the silent/ring toggle. And to make it more like the mainline iPhones, it will also transition to USB-C rather than Lightning.In October 2024, there was a report that we may see a big change with the iPhone SE 4, in that it may have a Plus-sized variant. Originally, it appears that the iPhone SE 4 was designed in a 6.7-inch model like the iPhone 14 Plus, but then it was decided later to have a 6.1-inch model like the iPhone 14. This would be the first time that Apple offered the iPhone SE in two sizes.The reason for the possibility of an iPhone SE Plus is likely that Apple is considering replacing the Plus models with a new Slim variant. Those who would still want an iPhone Plus could consider the iPhone SE Plus, which would also mean a lower price point than the flagship series.Joe Maring / Digital TrendsAll previous iPhone SE models used LCD technology for the display. However, with the iPhone SE 4, Apple could switch to OLED.To recall, sources like Bloomberg have reported that the iPhone SE borrows inspiration from the iPhone 14, so it wont be surprising to see Apple digging into the parts bin and surprise us with an OLED screen in the next SE iPhone.Apple has been using OLED panels for iPhones since the iPhone 12. Switching to OLED would make the iPhone SE 4 more akin to the flagship models but still at a lower price. OLED displays have deeper, richer blacks and better contrast compared to LCD. If the switch is happening, it would be a big upgrade for the budget iPhone. However, given Apples history of serving LCD panels for years on the mainline iPhones, it wont be surprising to see the next iPhone SE stick with an LCD stack.Apples history with cost-cutting and a maximum profit approach are no secret. And given the target price bracket for the iPhone SE, we are neither too hopeful about an OLED panel upgrade, nor a 120Hz refresh rate.iPhone 14 Plus (left) and iPhone SE (2022) Andy Boxall / Digital TrendsTraditionally, the iPhone SE has used a prior-generation chip to make it more budget-friendly, but rumors now suggest the iPhone SE 4 will run the same A18 chip as the iPhone 16. This will enable Apple Intelligence features, although probably on a more limited scale than the flagship models.If the iPhone SE 4 does support Apple Intelligence, it will have at least 8GB of RAM, which is currently the baseline requirement for any Apple device running its AI stack.There have also been rumors that Apple has been working on an in-house 5G chip, which could appear in the iPhone SE 4. This would result from Apple acquiring Intels modem business in 2019, leading the company to build and use its modems in future devices rather than relying on Qualcomm.Mark Gurman at Bloomberg, a reliable Apple tipster, has claimed that Apple will begin a three-year transition to its own in-house modems, similar to the M-series transition from Intel. This transition will begin in 2025, and the first device to adopt an in-house modem will reportedly be the iPhone SE 4.As far as the storage goes, we are not sure if Apple will finally end the streak of 64GB storage options. But given the phones target audience, it is likely that Apple will stick with offering a low-storage option so that the sticker price remains alluring.Andy Boxall / Digital TrendsAll models of the iPhone SE thus far have only had a single-lens camera, and the iPhone SE 4 will likely follow that trend. After all, the base model iPhones have dual camera setups, while the Pro models have triple lenses.Keeping the SE at a single lens would prevent it from potentially cannibalizing the other models. A report in December has given us a sneak peek at what to expect with the rear and front-facing cameras on the iPhone SE 4. To keep it modern, the iPhone SE 4 is expected to get a single 48-megapixel rear camera and a 12-megapixel TrueDepth camera on the front, according to recent supply reports from Korea.The TrueDepth camera would align with Face ID coming to the iPhone SE, finally eliminating the home button once and for all. Jumping to a 48-megapixel camera tagging alongside a faster silicon with an advanced image signal processor is also a sign that there will be new camera features to play with, as well.Majin BuApple has marketed its 48-megapixel snapper as the Fusion Camera, which is a huge leap compared to the 12-megapixel sensor on the existing iPhone SE. The high resolution not only allows binned 12-megapixel capture, but also lets users capture more detailed 24-megapixel as well as full-res 48-megapixel shots.Thanks to the sensor upgrade, Apple has also enabled 2x zoom output in 12-megapixel telephoto mode atop the same sensor. If the primary sensor + processing stack on the iPhone 16 is taken as a template, the iPhone SE 4 might also deliver updates such as Smart HDR 5, improved portraits, photographic styles, and more advanced video recording facilities.Andy Boxall / Digital TrendsOne of the iPhone SEs most significant weaknesses is its battery life, which is due to its small size. The iPhone SE 3 currently only has a 2,018mAh battery, which doesnt last as long as those in flagship iPhone models. However, if Apple were to move to an iPhone 14 design, there would be more room for a larger battery.The iPhone 14 currently has around 3,279mAh, which is much better than the iPhone SE. However, that might not be enough; with Apple Intelligence and potentially an OLED panel coming into the picture, the iPhone 4 SE may not exactly deliver a battery endurance revolution because of increased power demands.For now, thats all we know. Take these rumors with a healthy dose of salt; Apple has a way of surprising its customer base, so we wont know the official specs until much closer to launch. Regardless, the iPhone SE 4 looks much better on paper than its predecessors and more like a proper phone than a highly stripped-down version of last years model.Editors Recommendations

Imagine you run a meal prep company that teaches people how to make simple and delicious food. When someone asks ChatGPT for a recommendation for meal prep companies, yours is described as complicated and confusing. Why? Because the AI saw that in one of your ads there were chopped chives on the top of a bowl of food, and it determined that nobody is going to want to spend time chopping up chives. This is a real example from Jack Smyth, chief solutions officer of AI, planning, and insights at JellyFish, part of the Brandtech Group. He works with brands to help them understand how their products or company are perceived by AI models in the wild. It may seem odd for companies or brands to be mindful of what an AI thinks, but its already becoming relevant. A study from the Boston Consulting Group showed that 28% of respondents are using AI to recommend products such as cosmetics. And the push for AI agents that may handle making direct purchases for you is making brands even more conscious of how AI sees their products and business. The end results may be a supercharged version of search engine optimization (SEO) where making sure that youre positively perceived by a large language model might become one of the most important things a brand can do. Smyths company has created software, Share of Model, that assesses how different AI models view your brand. Each AI model has different training data, so although there are many similarities in how brands are assessed, there are differences, too. For example, Metas Llama model may perceive your brand as exciting and reliable, whereas OpenAIs ChatGPT may view it as exciting but not necessarily reliable. Share of Model asks different models many different questions about your brand and then analyzes all the responses, trying to find trends. Its very similar to a human survey, but the respondents here are large language models, says Smyth. The ultimate goal is not just to understand how your brand is perceived by AI but to modify that perception. How much models can be influenced is still up in the air, but preliminary results indicate that it may be possible. Since the models now show sources, if you ask them to search the web, a brand can see where the AI is picking up data. We have a brand called Ballantines. Its the No. 2 Scotch whisky that we sell in the world. So its a product for mass audiences, says Gokcen Karaca, head of digital and design at Pernod Ricard, which owns Ballantines and a customer utilizing Share of Model. However, Llama was identifying it as a premium product. Ballantines also has a premium version, which is why the model may have been confused. So Karacas team created new assets like ad campaigns for Ballantines mass product, highlighting its universal appeal to counteract the premium image. Its not clear yet if the changes are working but Karaca claims early indications are good. We made tiny changes, and it is taking time. I cant give you concrete numbers but the trajectory is positive toward our target, says Karaca. Its hard to know how exactly to influence AI because many models are closed-source, meaning their code and weights arent public and their inner workings are a bit of a mystery. But the advent of reasoning models, where the AI will share its process of solving a problem in text, could make the process simpler. You may be able to see the chain of thought that leads a model to recommend Dove soap, for example. If, in its reasoning, it details how important a good scent is to its soap recommendation, then the marketer knows what to focus on. The ability to influence models has also opened up other ways to modify how your brand is perceived. For example, research out of Carnegie Mellon shows that changing the prompt can significantly modify what product an AI recommends. For example, take these two prompts: 1. Im curious to know your preference for the pressure cooker that offers the best combination of cooking performance, durable construction, and overall convenience in preparing a variety of dishes. 2. Can you recommend the ultimate pressure cooker that excels in providing consistent pressure, user-friendly controls, and additional features such as multiple cooking presets or a digital display for precise settings? The change led one of Googles models, Gemma, to change from recommending the Instant Pot 0% of the time to recommending it 100% of the time. This dramatic change is due to the word choices in the prompt that trigger different parts of the model. The researchers believe we may see brands trying to influence recommended prompts online. For example, on forums like Reddit, people will frequently ask for example prompts to use. Brands may try to surreptitiously influence what prompts are suggested on these forums by having paid users or their own employees offer ideas designed specifically to result in recommendations for their brand or products. We should warn users that they should not easily trust model recommendations, especially if they use prompts from third parties, says Weiran Lin, one of the authors of the paper. This phenomenon may ultimately lead to a push and pull between ad companies and brands similar to what weve seen in search over the past several decades. Its always a cat-and-mouse game, says Smyth. Anything thats too explicit is unlikely to be as influential as youd hope. Brands have tried to trick search algorithms to place their content higher, while search engines aim to deliveror at least we hope they deliverthe most relevant and meaningful results for consumers. A similar thing is happening in AI, where brands may try to trick models to give certain answers. Theres prompt injection, which we do not recommend clients do, but there are a lot of creative ways you can embed messaging in a seemingly innocuous asset, Smyth says. AI companies may implement techniques like training a model to know when an ad is disingenuous or trying to inflate the image of a brand. Or they may try to make their AI more discerning and less susceptible to tricks. Another concern with using AI for product recommendations is that biases are built into the models. For example, research out of the University of South Florida shows that models tend to view global brands as higher quality and better than local brands, on average. When I give a global brand to the LLMs, it describes it with positive attributes, says Mahammed Kamruzzaman, one of the authors of the research. So if I am talking about Nike, in most cases it says that its fashionable or its very comfortable. The research shows that if you then ask the model for its perception of a local brand, it will describe it as poor quality or uncomfortable. Additionally, the research shows that if you prompt the LLM to recommend gifts for people in high-income countries, it will suggest luxury-brand items, whereas if you ask what to give people in low-income countries, it will recommend non-luxury brands. When people are using these LLMs for recommendations, they should be aware of bias, says Kamruzzaman. AI can also serve as a focus group for brands. Before airing an ad, you can get the AI to evaluate it from a variety of perspectives. You can specify the audience for your ad, says Smyth. One of our clients called it their gen-AI gut check. Even before they start making the ad, they say, Ive got a few different ways I could be thinking about going to market. Lets just check with the models. Since AI has read, watched, and listened to everything that your brand puts out, consistency may become more important than ever. Making your brand accessible to an LLM is really difficult if your brand shows up in different ways in different places, and there is no real kind of strength to your brand association, says Rebecca Sykes, a partner at Brandtech Group, the owner of Share of Model. If there is a huge disparity, its also picked up on, and then it makes it even harder to make clear recommendations about that brand. Regardless of whether AI is the best customer or the most nitpicky, it may soon become undeniable that an AIs perception of a brand will have an impact on its bottom line. Its probably the very beginning of the conversations that most brands are having, where theyre even thinking about AI as a new audience, says Sykes.

At about the time when personal computers charged into cubicle farms, another machine muscled its way into human resources departments and became a staple of routine employment screenings. By the early 1980s, some 2 million Americans annually found themselves strapped to a polygrapha metal box that, in many peoples minds, detected deception. Most of those tested were not suspected crooks or spooks. Then the US Office of Technology Assessment, an independent office that had been created by Congress about a decade earlier to serve as its scientific consulting arm, got involved. The office reached out to Boston University researcher Leonard Saxe with an assignment: Evaluate polygraphs. Tell us the truth about these supposed truth-telling devices. And so Saxe assembled a team of about a dozen researchers, including Michael Saks of Boston College, to begin a systematic review. The group conducted interviews, pored over existing studies, and embarked on new lines of research. A few months later, the OTA published a technical memo, Scientific Validity of Polygraph Testing: A Research Review and Evaluation. Despite the tests widespread use, the memo dutifully reported, there is very little research or scientific evidence to establish polygraph test validity in screening situations, whether they be preemployment, preclearance, periodic or aperiodic, random, or dragnet. These machines could not detect lies. Four years later, in 1987, critics at a congressional hearing invoked the OTA report as authoritative, comparing polygraphs derisively to tea leaf reading or crystal ball gazing. Congress soon passed strict limits on the use of polygraphs in the workplace. Over its 23-year history, the OTA would publish some 750 reportslengthy, interdisciplinary assessments of specific technologies that proposed means of maximizing their benefits and minimizing harms. Their subjects included electronic surveillance, genetic engineering, hazardous-waste disposal, and remote sensing from outer space. Congress set its course: The office initiated studies only at the request of a committee chairperson, a ranking minority leader, or its 12-person bipartisan board. The investigations remained independent; staffers and consultants from both inside and outside government collaborated to answer timely and sometimes politicized questions. The reports addressed worries about alarming advances and tamped down scary-sounding hypotheticals. Some of those concerns no longer keep policymakers up at night. For instance, Do Insects Transmit AIDS? A 1987 OTA report correctly suggested that they dont. The office functioned like a debunking arm. It sussed out the snake oil. Lifted the lid on the Mechanical Turk. The reports saw through the alluring gleam of overhyped technologies. In the years since its unceremonious defunding, perennial calls have gone out: Rouse the office from the dead! And with advances in robotics, big data, and AI systems, these calls have taken on a new level of urgency. Like polygraphs, chatbots and search engines powered by so-called artificial intelligence come with a shimmer and a sheen of magical thinking. And if were not careful, politicians, employers, and other decision-makers may accept at face value the idea that machines can and should replace human judgment and discretion. A resurrected OTA might be the perfect body to rein in dangerous and dangerously overhyped technologies. Thats what Congress needs right now, says Ryan Calo at the University of Washingtons Tech Policy Lab and the Center for an Informed Public, because otherwise Congress is going to, like, take Sam Altmans word for everything, or Eric Schmidts. (The CEO of OpenAI and the former CEO of Google have both testified before Congress.) Leaving it to tech executives to educate lawmakers is like having the fox tell you how to build your henhouse. Wasted resources and inadequate protections might be only the start. A man administers a lie detector test to a job applicant in 1976. A 1983 report from the OTA debunked the efficacy of polygraphs.LIBRARY OF CONGRESS No doubt independent expertise still exists. Congress can turn to the Congressional Research Service, for example, or the National Academies of Sciences, Medicine, and Engineering. Other federal entities, such as the Office of Management and Budget and the Office of Science and Technology Policy, have advised the executive branch (and still existed as we went to press). But theyre not even necessarily specialists, Calo says, and what theyre producing is very lightweight compared to what the OTA did. And so I really think we need OTA back. What exists today, as one researcher puts it, is a diffuse and inefficient system. There is no central agency that wholly devotes itself to studying emerging technologies in a serious and dedicated way and advising the countrys 535 elected officials about potential impacts. The digestible summaries Congress receives from the Congressional Research Service provide insight but are no replacement for the exhaustive technical research and analytic capacity of a fully staffed and funded think tank. Theres simply nothing like the OTA, and no single entity replicates its incisive and instructive guidance. But theres also nothing stopping Congress from reauthorizing its budget and bringing it back, except perhaps the lack of political will. Congress Smiles, Scientists Wince The OTA had not exactly been an easy sell to the research community in 1972. At the time, it was only the third independent congressional agency ever established. As the journal Science put it in a headline that year, The Office of Technology Assessment: Congress Smiles, Scientists Wince. One researcher from Bell Labs told Science that he feared legislators would embark on a clumsy, destructive attempt to manage national R&D, but mostly the cringe seemed to stem from uncertainty about what exactly technology assessment entailed. The OTAs first report, in 1974, examined bioequivalence, an essential part of evaluating generic drugs. Regulators were trying to figure out whether these drugs could be deemed comparable to their name-brand equivalents without lengthy and expensive clinical studies demonstrating their safety and efficacy. Unlike all the OTAs subsequent assessments, this one listed specific policy recommendations, such as clarifying what data should be required in order to evaluatea generic drug and ensure uniformity and standardization in the regulatory approval process. The Food and Drug Administration later incorporated these recommendations into its own submission requirements. From then on, though, the OTA did not take sides. The office had not been set up to advise Congress on how to legislate. Rather, it dutifully followed through on its narrowly focused mandate: Do the research and provide policymakers with a well-reasoned set of options that represented a range of expert opinions. Perhaps surprisingly, given the rise of commercially available PCs, in the first decade of its existence the OTA produced only a few reports on computing. One 1976 report touched on the automated control of trains. Others examined computerized x-ray imaging, better known as CT scans; computerized crime databases; and the use of computers in medical education. Over time, the offices output steadily increased, eventually averaging 32 reports a year. Its budget swelled to $22 million; its staff peaked at 143. While its sometimes said that the future impact of a technology is beyond anyones imagination, several findings proved prescient. A 1982 report on electronic funds transfer, or EFT, predicted that financial transactions would increasingly be carried out electronically (an obvious challenge to paper currency and hard-copy checks). Another predicted that email, or what was then termed electronic message systems, would disrupt snail mail and the bottom line of the US Postal Service. In vetting the digital record-keeping that provides the basis for routine background checks, the office commissioned a study that produced a statistic still cited today, suggesting that only about a quarter of the records sent to the FBI were complete, accurate, and unambiguous. It was an indicator of a growing issue: computational systems that, despite seeming automated, are not free of human bias and error. Many of the OTAs reports focus on specific events or technologies. One looked at Love Canal, the upstate New York neighborhood polluted by hazardous waste (a disaster, the report said, that had not yet been remediated by the Environmental Protection Agencys Superfund cleanup program); another studied the Boston Elbow, a cybernetic limb (the verdict: decidedly mixed). The office examined the feasibility of a water pipeline connecting Alaska to California, the health effects of the Kuwait oil fires, and the news medias use of satellite imagery. The office also took on issues we grapple with todayevaluating automatic record checks for people buying guns, scrutinizing the compensation for injuries allegedly caused by vaccines, and pondering whether we should explore Mars. The OTA made its biggest splash in 1984, when it published a background report criticizing the Strategic Defense Initiative (commonly known as Star Wars), a pet project of the Reagan administration that involved several exotic missile defense systems. Its lead author was the MIT physicist Ashton Carter, later secretary of defense in the second Obama administration. And the report concluded that a perfect or near-perfect system to defend against nuclear weapons was basically beyond the realm of the plausible; the possibility of deployment was so remote that it should not serve as the basis of public expectation or national policy. The report generated lots of clicks, so to speak, especially after the administration claimed that the OTA had divulged state secrets. These charges did not hold up and Star Wars never materialized, although there have been recent efforts to beef up the militarys offensive capacity in space. But for the work of an advisory body that did not play politics, the report made a big political hubbub. By some accounts, its subsequent assessments became so neutral that the office risked receding to the point of invisibility. From a purely pragmatic point of view, the OTA wrote to be understood. A dozen reports from the early 90s received Blue Pencil Awards, given by the National Association of Government Communicators for superior government communication products and those who produce them. None are copyrighted. All were freely reproduced and distributed, both in print and electronically. The entire archive is stored on CD-ROM, and digitized copies are still freely available for download on a website maintained by Princeton University, like an earnest oasis of competence in the cloistered world of federal documents. Assessments versus accountability Looking back, the office took shape just as debates about technology and the law were moving to center stage. While the gravest of dangers may have changed in form and in scope, the central problem remains: Laws and lawmakers cannot keep up with rapid technological advances. Policymakers often face a choice between regulating with insufficient facts and doing nothing. In 2018, Adam Kinzinger, then a Republican congressman from Illinois, confessed to a panel on quantum computing: I can understand about 50% of the things you say. To some, his admission underscored a broader tech illiteracy afflicting those in power. But other commentators argued that members of Congress should not be expected to know it allall the more reason to restaff an office like the OTA. A motley chorus of voices have clamored for an OTA 2.0 over the years. One doctor wrote that the office could help address the discordance between the amount of money spent and the actual level of health. Tech fellows have said bringing it back could help Congress understand machine learning and AI. Hillary Clinton, as a Democratic presidential hopeful, floated the possibility of resurrecting the OTA in 2017. But Meg Leta Jones, a law scholar at Georgetown University, argues that assessing new technologies is the least of our problems. The kind of work the OTA did is now done by other agencies, such as the FTC, FCC, and National Telecommunications and Information Administration, she says: The energy I would like to put into the administrative state is not on assessments, but its on actual accountability and enforcement. She sees the existing framework as built for the industrial age, not a digital one, and is among those calling for a more ambitious overhaul. There seems to be little political appetite for the creation of new agencies anyway. That said, Jones adds, I wouldnt be mad if they remade the OTA. No one can know whether or how future administrations will address AI, Mars colonization, the safety of vaccines, or, for that matter, any other emerging technology that the OTA investigated in an earlier era. But if the new administration makes good on plans to deregulate many sectors, its worth noting some historic echoes. In 1995, when conservative politicians defunded the OTA, they did so in the name of efficiency. Critics of that move contend that the office probably saved the government money and argue that the purported cost savings associated with its elimination were largely symbolic. Jathan Sadowski, a research fellow at Monash University in Melbourne, Australia, who has written about the OTAs history, says the conditions that led to its demise have only gotten more partisan, more politicized. This makes it difficult to envision a place for the agency today, he saysTheres no room for the kind of technocratic navet that would see authoritative scientific advice cutting through the noise of politics. Congress purposely cut off its scientific advisory arm as part of a larger shake-up led by Newt Gingrich, then the House Speaker, whose pugilistic brand of populist conservatism promised drain the swamptype reforms and launched what critics called a war on science. As a rationale for why the office was defunded, he said, We constantly found scientists who thought what they were saying was not correct. Once again, Congress smiled and scientists winced. Only this time it was because politicians had pulled the plug. Peter Andrey Smith, a freelance reporter, has contributed to Undark, the New Yorker, the New York Times Magazine, and WNYCs Radiolab.

Chef Heena Patel of Besharam in San Francisco shared her tips for finding a great Indian restaurant.Patel said you should always try an Indian restaurant that makes their roti and naan in-house.Okra, bitter melon, and opo squash are green flags on any Indian restaurant menu.When Heena Patel first moved to the Bay Area in California, she started selling her homemade Gujarati food at the local farmers market. She'd often come home without making a profit, but she refused to give up on her dream or her cuisine.Patel is now the James Beard-nominated owner and chef of Besharam, a regional Gujarati restaurant in San Francisco that pays tribute to the dishes of her heritage and childhood."Just as my guests step outside their comfort zones, I do the same with them, trusting they'll embrace my menu with an open mind," Patel told Business Insider. "That's how I hope to put Gujarati food on the map."Patel also hopes to help diners expand their perception of Indian cuisine. Here are her tips for finding a great Indian restaurant.Look for a variety of regional dishes Heena Patel is the owner and chef of Besharam in San Francisco. Sarah Felker "India has so much to offer, and each dish is rich with history," Patel said. "Growing up, we tried foods from many different regions that have enriched my palate and helped shape me as a chef.""If you see menus that highlight different dishes from various regions in India, it is a good indication that the chef is focused on authentic regional cuisine," she added.When it comes to Gujarati dishes, Patel recommends trying rotla a traditional flatbread which, unlike naan, is unleavened and dhokla, a savory sponge cake. The malai kofta dish at Besharam. Eric Wolfinger For North Indian cuisine, Patel loves sarson ka saag a Punjabi dish of mustard greens cooked with spices and the lamb kebabs of Uttar Pradesh.You can't go wrong with vindaloo, a spicy and tangy curry dish from Goa in western India, or sambhar, a lentil-based stew from Tamil Nadu, the southernmost state. Bengal's mishti doi dessert will give you a taste of the east, while chana samosas from Chhattisgarh will take you to India's central region.Okra and bitter melon are green flags"Produce like okra, bitter melon, and opo squash are common in Indian cooking," Patel said. "So if you see these ingredients on a menu, you're in for a treat."One of Patel's favorite okra dishes is bhindi masala, which she said "allows okra to shine with its crisp texture."And don't forget about the bread Patel's parathas with raspberry dip at Besharam. Eric Wolfinger "It is definitely worth trying an Indian restaurant that makes rotis and naan in-house," Patel told BI.Indian cuisine also features a variety of flatbreads popular in different regions. Patel recommends trying rotli, paratha, and bhakri.And once you've found a great restaurant, don't play it safe and always stick to the same dishes."Indian food isn't just about individual dishes; it's about building each bite with different flavors," Patel said. "A curry or a dal on its own is just one part of the experience.""The real magic happens when you layer flavors by adding chutneys, pickles, rotis, and rice," she added. "My advice? Trust your server."

Bosses are running low on empathy and some companies are cutting roles.It's an employers' market, and some are using tactics to get rid of low performers.It might be time to work harder and not seek extra flexibility, says HR consultant Suzanne Lucas.Bosses are running low on empathy. Some want their workers back in the office more often, and are becoming less interested in the demands of mental health-conscious Gen Zers wanting work-life balance.They have a good enough reason: an era of revenge quitting may be on the horizon, but right now it's an employer's market.Meta, Microsoft, BP, and Boeing are just a few companies laying off staff in 2025.Some employers are also getting more creative about how they're letting low-performing staff go, engaging in tactics such as "stealth firing," where they implement strict return-to-office mandates to make employees' roles increasingly uncomfortable and less appealing.Others are cracking down on what The Wall Street Journal described as "little sins," terminating workers for small indiscretions. Meta fired some workers who used food vouchers improperly, while some EY staff met the same fate for watching multiple training videos simultaneously.Joe Galvin, chief research officer at executive coaching platform Vistage, told Business Insider that bosses are under more pressure to ensure their employees are top performers.Workers, on the other hand, are wrestling with what pandemic-era flexibility they're prepared to give up."Maybe bosses are saying, I don't have to put up with this millennial or Gen Z stuff," Galvin said. "There's a common thread underneath it all, and that's the tension between the boss and the worker."Employers' marketThe power dynamic between employers and employees is a constant pendulum, and it can swing at any moment."When it's an employers' market, which it is right now, companies are much more picky than when it's an employees' market," Suzanne Lucas told BI. She's a human resources consultant and writer who became known for her blog, The Evil HR Lady.Many highly skilled and experienced people have lost their jobs recently. Google has offered buyouts to 25,000 employees, and at least 65,000 federal workers have opted into President Donald Trump's deferred resignation program.The volume of talent entering the jobseeking pool is means "companies can be really choosy right now," Lucas said. "If you're a slacker, I can find someone to replace you. In other words, employees better be working hard." Suzanne Lucas wrote a blog called The Evil HR Lady. Suzanne Lucas Meta fired about two dozen staff last year for using their $25 meal credits to buy things other than food, but Lucas said it was never really about the actual purchases."Once somebody breaks that barrier, then everybody else starts breaking that barrier," she said. "It's really not a matter of punishing someone for buying toothpaste it's a matter of making sure everybody knows that there is a line that you don't cross."Protecting yourselfMona Mourshed, the CEO of the employment nonprofit Generation, told BI that workers can protect themselves in a turbulent environment by investing their time in new skills, particularly in learning about AI tools."What's very clear is that within every company, there are some people who are power users, and everyone else is dabbling or not really using it," she said. "We all need to figure out how to make the most of it."Mourshed also recommended getting exposure to different parts of the business with projects or teamwork."Do that because, essentially, it enables you to have cross-functional skills," she said. "In your team, there might be some disruption, but maybe that creates an opportunity for you in a different team of the same organization, or potentially another one."What's very clear, Mourshed said, is that "doing the same thing for a decade is a pattern of the past."Lucas said not all companies will fire workers for small indiscretions, but if an employer is looking to let people go, those making minor missteps could be first on the list."My advice to the employees is to realize that you need to be a good worker it's called work for a reason," Lucas said. "Maybe work harder. Maybe now isn't the time to be asking for extra benefits and extra flexibility."

Marvel Rivals has seen a huge wave of players jump into the Hero shooter, but just as the studio was gearing up for this week's Season 1.5 update, the entire US-based team was laid offTech09:43, 19 Feb 2025Marvel Rivals will now seemingly be developed solely in China(Image: NetEase Games)Marvel Rivals has been a rare example of a free-to-play debut that keeps pulling in players, and while Overwatch Season 15 kicked off for its rival yesterday, Netease has laid off an entire team just days before the next update.The game, which is in the middle of its first season of content, was co-developed between two Netease teams; one in the US, and one in China, where the company is based. The Seattle team is reportedly tasked with level design and gameplay.Posting on LinkedIn yesterday, Thaddeus Sasser, who was Game Director on Marvel Rivals, revealed that he had been laid off, along with the rest of the Seattle team.This week sees The Human Torch and The Thing added(Image: Netease/Marvel)This is such a weird industry, Sasser said. My stellar, talented team just helped deliver an incredibly successful new franchise in Marvel Rivals for NetEase Games and were just laid off!Sasser took the opportunity to focus on his colleagues that were also let go, while the game's Level Designer Jack Burrows said "Welp, just got laid off from my job working on Marvel Rivals with NetEase.""Was an enormous pleasure to work with my American coworkers who join me in this sad culling.""Just couldn't dodge that big boot I guess, no matter how big the success of the gig."While layoffs have become a sad part of the games industry after a horrendous 2024, it's surprising to see a company lay off an entire team with the game hitting 10 million players in just 72 hours.Marvel Rivals has attracted a lot of Overwatch players(Image: NetEase Games)Last year saw thousands of layoffs across studios and publishers of all sizes, and some have suggested Netease will now look to rehire for those roles in China.Mat Piscatella, Executive Director and Video Game Industry Analyst at Circana, posted on Bluesky to say "It [Marvel Rivals] has been a massive hit, and one of the few games that has been able to break through the live service wall," pointing to it being among the top 5 games in active users across multiple platforms.Just before publishing this story, Netease published a statement, shared by Game File's Stephen Totilo."We recently made the difficult decision to adjust Marvel Rivals' development team structure for organizational reasons and to optimize development efficiency for the game. This resulted in a reduction of a design team based in Seattle that is part of a larger global design function in support of Marvel Rivals.""We appreciate the hard work and dedication of those affected and will be treating them confidentially and respectfully with recognition for their individual contributions.""We want to reassure our fanbase that the core development team for Marvel Rivals, which continues to be led by Lead Producer Weicong Wu and Game Creative Director Guangyun Chen in Guangzhou, China, remains fully committed to delivering an exceptional experience.""We are investing more, not less, into the evolution and growth of this game. We're excited to deliver new super hero characters, maps, features, and content to ensure an engaging live service experience for our worldwide player base."Article continues belowFor more on Marvel Rivals, check out what the devs had to say about a potential Switch 2 port of the free-to-play phenomenon.For the latest breaking news and stories from across the globe from the Daily Star, sign up for our newsletters.