This edition of the Venice Biennale includes 65 national pavilions, 11 collateral events, and over 750 participants in the international exhibition curated by Italian architect and engineer Carlo Ratti. Entitled Intelligens: Natural Artificial Collective, its stated aim is to make Venice a ‘living laboratory’. But Ratti’s exhibition in the Arsenale has been hit by mixed reviews. The AJ’s Rob Wilson described it as ‘a bit of a confusing mess’, while other media outlets have called the robot-heavy exhibit of future-facing building-focused solutions to the climate crisis a ‘tech-bro fever dream’ and a ‘mind-boggling rollercoaster’ to mention a few. It is a distinct shift away from the biennale of two years ago twhen Ghanaian-Scottish architect Lesley Lokko curated the main exhibitions, including 89 participants – of which more than half were from Africa or the African diaspora – in a convincing reset of the architectural conversation.Advertisement This year’s National Pavilions and collateral exhibits, by contrast, have tackled the largest themes in architecture and the world right now in a less constrained way than the main exhibitions. The exhibits are radical and work as a useful gauge for understanding what’s important in each country: decarbonisation, climate resilience, the reconstruction of Gaza, and an issue more prevalent in politics closer to home: gender wars. What's not to miss in the Giardini? British Pavilion (photography: Chris Lane) UK Pavilion The British Pavilion this year, which won a special mention from the Venetian jury, is housing a show by a British-Kenyan collab titled GBR – Geology of Britannic Repair. In it, the curators explore the links between colonialism, the built environment and geological extraction. Focusing on the Rift Valley, which runs from east Africa to the Middle East, including Palestine, the exhibition was curated by the Nairobi-based studio cave_bureau, UK-based curator, writer and Farrell Centre director Owen Hopkins and Queen Mary University professor Kathryn Yusoff. The pavilion’s façade is cloaked by a beaded veil of agricultural waste briquettes and clay and glass beads, produced in Kenya and India, echoing both Maasai practices and beads once made on Venice’s Murano, as currency for the exchange of metals, minerals and slaves. The pavilion’s six gallery spaces include multisensory installations such as the Earth Compass, a series of celestial maps connecting London and Nairobi; the Rift Room, tracing one of humans’ earliest migration routes; and the Shimoni Slave Cave, featuring a large-scale bronze cast of a valley cave historically used as a holding pen for enslaved people.Advertisement The show also includes Objects of Repair, a project by design-led research group Palestine Regeneration Team (PART), looking at how salvaged materials could help rebuild war-torn Gaza, the only exhibit anywhere in the Biennale that tackled the reconstruction of Gaza face-on – doing so impressively, both politically and sensitively. Read more here. Danish Pavilion (photography: Hampus Berndtson) Demark Pavilion A firm favourite by most this year, the Danish exhibition Build of Site, curated by Søren Pihlmann of Pihlmann Architects, transforms the pavilion, which requires renovation anyway, into both a renovation site and archive of materials. Clever, simple and very methodical, the building is being both renewed while at the same time showcasing innovative methods to reuse surplus materials uncovered during the construction process – as an alternative to using new resources to build a temporary exhibition. The renovation of the 1950s Peter Koch-designed section of the pavilion began in December 2024 and will be completed following the biennale, having been suspended for its duration. On display are archetypal elements including podiums, ramps, benches and tables – all constructed from the surplus materials unearthed during the renovation, such as wood, limestone, concrete, stone, sand, silt and clay. Belgian Pavilion (photography: Michiel De Cleene) Belgium Pavilion If you need a relaxing break from the intensity of the biennale, then the oldest national pavilion in the Giardini is the one for you. Belgium’s Building Biospheres: A New Alliance between Nature and Architecture brings ‘plant intelligence’ to the fore. Commissioned by the Flanders Architecture Institute and curated by landscape architect Bas Smets and neurobiologist Stefano Mancuso, the exhibit investigates how the natural ‘intelligence’ of plants can be used to produce an indoor climate – elevating the role of landscape design and calling for it to no longer serve as a backdrop for architecture. Inside, more than 200 plants occupy the central area beneath the skylight, becoming the pavilion’s centrepiece, with the rear space visualising ‘real-time’ data on the prototype’s climate control performance. Spanish Pavilion (photography: Luca Capuano) Spain Pavilion One for the pure architecture lovers out there, models (32!), installations, photographs and timber structures fill the Spanish Pavilion in abundance. Neatly curated by architects Roi Salgueiro Barrio and Manuel Bouzas Barcala, Internalities shows a series of existing and research projects that have contributed to decarbonising construction in Spain. The outcome? An extensive collection of work exploring the use of very local and very specific regenerative and low-carbon construction and materials – including stone, wood and soil. The joy of this pavilion comes from the 16 beautiful timber frames constructed from wood from communal forests in Galicia. Polish Pavilion (photography: Luca Capuano) Poland Pavilion Poland’s pavilion was like Marmite this year. Some loved its playful approach while others found it silly. Lares and Penates, taking its name from ancient Roman deities of protection, has been curated by Aleksandra Kędziorek and looks at what it means and takes to have a sense of security in architecture. Speaking to many different anxieties, it refers to the unspoken assumption of treating architecture as a safe haven against the elements, catastrophes and wars – showcasing and elevating the mundane solutions and signage derived from building, fire and health regulations. The highlight? An ornate niche decorated with tiles and stones just for … a fire extinguisher. Dutch Pavilion (photography: Cristiano Corte) Netherlands Pavilion Punchy and straight to the point, SIDELINED: A Space to Rethink Togetherness takes sports as a lens for looking at how spatial design can both reveal and disrupt the often-exclusionary dynamics of everyday environments. Within the pavilion, the exhibit looks beyond the large-scale arena of the stadium and gymnasium to investigate the more localised and intimate context of the sports bar, as well as three alternative sports – a site of both social production and identity formation – as a metaphor for uniting diverse communities. The pavilion-turned-sports bar, designed by Koos Breen and Jeannette Slütter and inspired by Asger Jorn’s three-sided sports field, is a space for fluidity and experimentation where binary oppositions, social hierarchies and cultural values are contested and reshaped – complete with jerseys and football scarfs (currently a must-have fashion item) worn by players in the alternative Anonymous Allyship aligning the walls. Read Derin Fadina’s review for the AJ here. Performance inside the Nordic Countries Pavilion (photography: Venla Helenius) Nordic Countries Pavilion Probably the most impactful national pavilion this year (and with the best tote bag by far), the Nordic Countries have presented an installation with performance work. Curated by Kaisa Karvinen, Industry Muscle: Five Scores for Architecture continues Finnish artist Teo Ala-Ruona’s work on trans embodiment and ecology by considering the trans body as a lens through which to examine modern architecture and the built environment. The three-day exhibition opening featured a two-hour performance each day with Ala-Ruona and his troupe crawling, climbing and writhing around the space, creating a bodily dialogue with the installations and pavilion building itself, which was designed by celebrated Modernist architect Sverre Fehn. The American pavilion next door, loudly (country music!) turns its back on what’s going on in its own country by just celebrating the apathetical porch, making the Nordic Countries seem even more relevant in this crucial time. Read Derin Fadina’s review for the AJ here. German Pavilion (photography: Luca Capuano) Germany Pavilion An exhibit certainly grabbing the issue of climate change by its neck is the German contribution, Stresstest. Curated by Nicola Borgmann, Elisabeth Endres, Gabriele G Kiefer and Daniele Santucci, the pavilion has turned climate change into a literal physical and psychological experience for visitors by creating contrasting ‘stress’ and ‘de-stress’ rooms. In the dark stress room, a large metal sculpture creates a cramped and hot space using heating mats hung from the ceiling and powered by PVs. Opposite is a calmer space demonstrating strategies that could be used to reduce the heat of cities, and between the two spaces is a film focusing on the impacts of cities becoming hotter. If this doesn’t highlight the urgency of the situation, I’m not sure what will. Best bits of the Arsenale outside the main exhibitions Bahrain Pavilion (photography: Andrea Avezzù) Bahrain Pavilion Overall winner of this year’s Golden Lion for best national participation, Bahrain’s pavilion in the historic Artiglierie of the Arsenale is a proposal for living and working through heat conditions. Heatwave, curated by architect Andrea Faraguna, reimagines public space design by exploring passive cooling strategies rooted in the Arab country’s climate, as well as cultural context. A geothermal well and solar chimney are connected through a thermo-hygrometric axis that links underground conditions with the air outside. The inhabitable space that hosts visitors is thus compressed and defined by its earth-covered floor and suspended ceiling, and is surrounded by memorable sandbags, highlighting its scalability for particularly hot construction sites in the Gulf where a huge amount of construction is taking place. In the Arsenale’s exhibition space, where excavation wasn’t feasible, this system has been adapted into mechanical ventilation, bringing in air from the canal side and channelling it through ductwork to create a microclimate. Slovenian Pavilion (photography: Andrea Avezzù) Slovenia Pavilion The AJ’s Rob Wilson’s top pavilion tip this year provides an enjoyable take on the theme of the main exhibition, highlighting how the tacit knowledge and on-site techniques and skills of construction workers and craftspeople are still the key constituent in architectural production despite all the heat and light about robotics, prefabrication, artificial intelligence and 3D printing. Master Builders, curated by Ana Kosi and Ognen Arsov and organised by the Museum of Architecture and Design (MAO) in Ljubljana, presents a series of ‘totems’ –accumulative sculpture-like structures that are formed of conglomerations of differently worked materials, finishes and building elements. These are stacked up into crazy tower forms, which showcase various on-site construction skills and techniques, their construction documented in accompanying films. Uzbekistan Pavilion (photography: Luca Capuano) Uzbekistan Pavilion Uzbekistan’s contribution explores the Soviet era solar furnace and Modernist legacy. Architecture studio GRACE, led by curators Ekaterina Golovatyuk and Giacomo Cantoni have curated A Matter of Radiance. The focus is the Sun Institute of Material Science – originally known as the Sun Heliocomplex – an incredible large-scale scientific structure built in 1987 on a natural, seismic-free foundation near Tashkent and one of only two that study material behaviour under extreme temperatures. The exhibition examines the solar oven’s site’s historical and contemporary significance while reflecting on its scientific legacy and influence moving beyond just national borders. Applied Arts Pavilion (photography: Andrea Avezzù) V&A Applied Arts Pavilion Diller Scofidio + Renfro (DS+R) is having a moment. The US-based practice, in collaboration with V&A chief curator Brendan Cormier, has curated On Storage, which aptly explores global storage architectures in a pavilion that strongly links to the V&A’s recent opening of Storehouse, its new (and free) collections archive in east London. Featured is a six-channel (and screen) film entitled Boxed: The Mild Boredom of Order, directed by the practice itself and following a toothbrush, as a metaphor for an everyday consumer product, on its journey through different forms of storage across the globe – from warehouse to distribution centre to baggage handlers down to the compact space of a suitcase. Also on display are large-format photographs of V&A East Storehouse, DS+R’s original architectural model and sketchbook and behind-the-scenes photography of Storehouse at work, taken by emerging east London-based photographers. Canal Café (photography: Marco Zorzanello) Canal café Golden Lion for the best participation in the actual exhibition went to Canal Café, an intervention designed by V&A East Storehouse’s architect DS+R with Natural Systems Utilities, SODAI, Aaron Betsky and Davide Oldani. Serving up canal-water espresso, the installation is a demonstration of how Venice itself can be a laboratory to understand how to live on the water in a time of water scarcity. The structure, located on the edge of the Arsenale’s building complex, draws water from its lagoon before filtering it onsite via a hybrid of natural and artificial methods, including a mini wetland with grasses. The project was recognised for its persistence, having started almost 20 years ago, just showing how water scarcity, contamination and flooding are still major concerns both globally and, more locally, in the tourist-heavy city of Venice. And what else? Holy See Pavilion (photography: Andrea Avezzù) The Holy See Much like the Danish Pavilion, the Pavilion of the Holy See is also taking on an approach of renewal this year. Over the next six months, Opera Aperta will breathe new life into the Santa Maria Ausiliatrice Complex in the Castello district of Venice. Founded as a hospice for pilgrims in 1171, the building later became the oldest hospital and was converted into school in the 18th century. In 2001, the City of Venice allocated it for cultural use and for the next four years it will be managed by the Dicastery for Culture and Education of the Holy See to oversee its restoration. Curated by architect, curator and researcher Marina Otero Verzier and artistic director of Fondaco Italia, Giovanna Zabotti, the complex has been turned into a constant ‘living laboratory’ of collective repair – and received a special mention in the biennale awards. The restoration works, open from Tuesday to Friday, are being carried out by local artisans and specialised restorers with expertise in recovering stone, marble, terracotta, mural and canvas painting, stucco, wood and metal artworks. The beauty, however, lies in the photogenic fabrics, lit by a warm yellow glow, hanging from the walls within, gently wrapping the building’s surfaces, leaving openings that allow movement and offer glimpses of the ongoing restoration. Mobile scaffolding, used to support the works, also doubles up as furniture, providing space for equipment and subdividing the interior. Togo Pavilion (photography: Andrea Avezzù) Togo Pavilion The Republic of Togo has presented its first pavilion ever at the biennale this year with the project Considering Togo’s Architectural Heritage, which sits intriguingly at the back of a second-hand furniture shop. The inaugural pavilion is curated by Lomé and Berlin-based Studio NEiDA and is in Venice’s Squero Castello. Exploring Togo’s architectural narratives from the early 20th century, and key ongoing restoration efforts, it documents key examples of the west African country’s heritage, highlighting both traditional and more modern building techniques – from Nôk cave dwellings to Afro-Brazilian architecture developed by freed slaves to post-independence Modernist buildings. Some buildings showcased are in disrepair, despite most of the modern structures remaining in use today, including Hotel de la Paix and the Bourse du Travail, suggestive of a future of repair and celebration. Estonian Pavilion (photography: Joosep Kivimäe) Estonia Pavilion Another firm favourite this year is the Estonian exhibition on Riva dei Sette Martiri on the waterfront between Corso Garibaldi and the Giardini.  The Guardian’s Olly Wainwright said that outside the Giardini, it packed ‘the most powerful punch of all.’ Simple and effective, Let Me Warm You, curated by trio of architects Keiti Lige, Elina Liiva and Helena Männa, asks whether current insulation-driven renovations are merely a ‘checkbox’ to meet European energy targets or ‘a real chance’ to enhance the spatial and social quality of mass housing. The façade of the historic Venetian palazzetto in which it is housed is clad with fibre-cement insulation panels in the same process used in Estonia itself for its mass housing – a powerful visual statement showcasing a problematic disregard for the character and potential of typical habitable spaces. Inside, the ground floor is wrapped in plastic and exhibits how the dynamics between different stakeholders influence spatial solutions, including named stickers to encourage discussion among your peers. Venice Procuratie (photography: Mike Merkenschlager) SMAC (San Marco Art Centre) Timed to open to the public at the same time as the biennale, SMAC is a new permanent arts institution in Piazza San Marco, on the second floor of the Procuratie, which is owned by Generali. The exhibition space, open to the public for the first time in 500 years, comprises 16 galleries arranged along a continuous corridor stretching over 80m, recently restored by David Chipperfield Architects. Visitors can expect access through a private courtyard leading on to a monumental staircase and experience a typically sensitive Chipperfield restoration, which has revived the building’s original details: walls covered in a light grey Venetian marmorino made from crushed marble and floors of white terrazzo. During the summer, its inaugural programme features two solo exhibitions dedicated to Australian modern architect Harry Seidler and Korean landscape designer Jung Youngsun. Holcim's installation (photography: Celestia Studio) Holcim x Elemental Concrete manufacturer Holcim makes an appearance for a third time at Venice, this time partnering with Chilean Pritzker Prize-winning Alejandro Aravena’s practice Elemental – curator of the 2016 biennale – to launch a resilient housing prototype that follows on from the Norman Foster-designed Essential Homes Project. The ‘carbon-neutral’ structure incorporates Holcim’s range of low-carbon concrete ECOPact and is on display as part of the Time Space Existence exhibition organised by the European Cultural Centre in their gardens. It also applies Holcim’s ‘biochar’ technology for the first time, a concrete mix with 100 per cent recycled aggregates, in a full-scale Basic Services Unit. This follows an incremental design approach, which could entail fast and efficient construction via the provision of only essential housing components, and via self-build. The Next Earth at Palazzo Diedo (photography: Joan Porcel) The Next Earth At Palazzo Diedo’s incredible dedicated Berggruen Arts and Culture space, MIT’s department of architecture and think tank Antikythera (apparently taking its name from the first-known computer) have come together to create the exhibition The Next Earth: Computation, Crisis, Cosmology, which questions how philosophy and architecture must and can respond to various planet-wide crises. Antikythera’s The Noocene: Computation and Cosmology from Antikythera to AI looks at the evolution of ‘planetary computation’ as an ‘accidental’ megastructure through which systems, from the molecular to atmospheric scales, become both comprehensible and composable. What is actually on display is an architectural scale video monolith and short films on AI, astronomy and artificial life, as well as selected artefacts. MIT’s Climate Work: Un/Worlding the Planet features 37 works-in-progress, each looking at material supply chains, energy expenditure, modes of practice and deep-time perspectives. Take from it what you will. The 19th International Venice Architecture Biennale remains open until Sunday, 23 November 2025.

Reading Time: 3 minutes In a recent webinar hosted by MoEngage, QSR marketing experts from Radar and Bottle Rocket came together to unpack the findings of the 2025 State of Cross-Channel Marketing for QSRs report.  With more than 800 total survey responses, including 70 from QSR marketers, this report revealed where quick-service restaurants are focusing their energy, what is holding them back, and the emerging strategies reshaping the guest experience. Here is a recap of the key takeaways, expert insights, and actionable advice shared by our panelists.   Where QSRs Are Focused in 2025: Loyalty, Personalization & Speed The webinar kicked off with a deep dive into shifting priorities. Customer engagement and loyalty emerged as the top focus for QSR marketers in 2025, with 80% of respondents increasing investment in customer experience technology. Mobile-first experiences and real-time personalization are no longer optional; they are essential for effective QSR marketing. Nick Patrick, CEO of Radar, put it simply: “Mobile has become the primary interface between QSRs and their customers. Real-time context is what makes that interface intelligent.” Challenges: Disconnected Data, Tech Silos, and Execution Speed While QSRs have the vision, many struggle with execution.  The report found that 60% of QSR leaders still struggle with personalization, and more than a quarter cited siloed data as a top challenge. The panelists echoed these findings, pointing to fragmented systems and misaligned teams as major hurdles. Brendan shared: “The POS system was designed for speed and accuracy, not personalization. But when you can use even a basic signal, like a loyalty status, to prompt a more human, high-touch experience, it makes a real difference.” Strategies That Work: Start Small, Focus Deep, Earn Trust Panelists emphasized the value of starting small with high-impact initiatives like curbside pickup or loyalty nudges. Cross-functional alignment and choosing scalable tech partners were key themes. “Don’t boil the ocean,” Brendan advised. “Start with one moment in the journey that can be improved and work cross-functionally to get it right.” Earning Location Opt-ins the Right Way Location data is a powerful lever for marketing and operations, but only if opt-ins are earned with care. Nick shared a practical framework: “It comes down to three things: transparency, value, and timing. You can’t just ask up front with no context and expect users to say yes.” He pointed to Outback Steakhouse as a standout example: “They clearly explain the value, guide users through branded screens, and then request OS-level permissions. It’s thoughtful, and it works.” AI in Action: Real Business Impact Artificial intelligence was another hot topic. Brendan shared two areas where AI is delivering real value: smarter cross-sell/upsell and feedback intelligence. “Even simple segmentation by daypart or region can lift basket size. Some tools report a 10% increase just by turning it on,” he said. “It doesn’t need to be complex to be effective.” QSR Webinar Recap: Closing Thoughts Whether optimizing app experiences, trying to unify your tech stack, automating manual processes, or building stronger loyalty loops, the advice was clear: start small, stay focused, and partner with tools and teams that can scale with you. Watch the full webinar on demand to explore these examples further and learn how MoEngage, Radar, and Bottle Rocket can help your team accelerate QSR engagement.   The post Digital Meets Dine-In: 5 Expert QSR Engagement Strategies appeared first on MoEngage.

After a tease in Netflix’s One Piece season 2 announcement way back in September 2023, Tony Tony Chopper, the Straw Hats’ resident reindeer-doctor, has officially boarded the pirate ship. Netflix revealed the beloved sidekick’s “live-action” look during its 2025 Tudum stream. Netflix also announced that actor Mikaela Hoover (Guardians of the Galaxy, Vol. 3, July’s Superman) provided Chopper’s voice and motion-capture. One Piece creator Eiichiro Oda, who has previously gushed over his experience working on the Netflix show, calling it his “last chance” to bring the manga to the masses, previously announced Chopper’s inclusion in the season 2 cast. And what would One Piece be without the wily doc? Not only has Chopper been around for most of Monkey D. Luffy’s quest to be the greatest pirate on the high seas, but his transformations over the years have served as a foundation for Oda’s evolving vision for the long-running series. His look in the live-action series was a big question, answered with respectable levels of CG. In season 2, Hoover joins the original Straw Hats cast of Iñaki Godoy, Mackenyu, Emily Rudd, Jacob Romero and Taz Skyla. Season 2 will also see a slew of new actors and characters, many of whom will attempt to kill Luffy. Look at this list: Charithra Chandran as Miss Wednesday Joe Manganiello as Mr. 0 Katey Sagal as Dr. Kureha Lera Abova as Miss All Sunday Mark Harelik as Dr. Hiriluk Sophia Anne Caruso as Miss Goldenweek Yonda Thomas as Igaram Sendhil Ramamurthy as Nefertari Cobra Brendan Sean Murray as Brogy Callum Kerr as Smoker Camrus Johnson as Mr. 5 Clive Russell as Crocus Daniel Lasker as Mr. 9 David Dastmalchian as Mr. 3 Jazzara Jaslyn as Miss Valentine Julia Rehwald as Tashigi Rob Colletti as Wapol Ty Keogh as Dalton Werner Coetser as Dorry Rigo Sanchez as Dragon James Hiroyuki Liao as Ipponmatsu Mark Penwill as Chess Anton Jeftha as K.M. Meanwhile, Netflix has a separate One Piece adaptation in the works, a new and condensed anime from Wit Studios. So expect even more Chopper reveals in the not-so-distant future.

By AJ Dellinger Published May 23, 2025 | Comments (0) | President Trump speaking at the Bitcoin 2024 Conference © Brett Carlsen/Bloomberg Last night, Donald Trump hosted 220 of the biggest suckers you know for dinner. As part of a promotion for his cryptocurrency memecoin $TRUMP, the President of the United States let the top bag holders of his coin come hang out, including offering a private VIP reception with the 25 biggest “investors.” According to the Wall Street Journal, the 220 who received invites spent a cumulative $148 million buying up $TRUMP before the event. The event, which was held at the Trump National Golf Club Washington DC in Potomac Falls, Virginia, was a real who’s who of people who make you go “I think I’ve heard of that person.” Perhaps the most famous person in the room was former NBA player Lamar Odom, who is now promoting his own memecoin. Others at the dinner included Brendan McCafferty, a guy CNN rather savagely called a “self-described media executive,” and Jeffrey Zirlin of the failed Axie Infinity game that got hacked for $600 million. The Wall Street Journal noted that many of the attendees were foreigners, many of whom are big players in the crypto space. Others were looking to influence American policy—like Javier Selgas, the CEO of shipping company Freight Technologies, who made headlines by announcing plans to buy up $TRUMP to get a seat next to the president and try to advocate for easing tariffs. The biggest mark of the night, though, was Justin Sun, a Chinese-born crypto mogul who has made himself a bit of a central figure in the Trump crypto cinematic universe. Sun faced charges from the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission for allegedly manipulating the price of his cryptocurrency $TRON. Earlier this year, Sun purchased $75 million worth of tokens from World Liberty Financial, the “decentralized finance protocol” run by Trump’s kids, and found his charges dropped. Sun was identified as the top holder of $TRUMP at the dinner event, holding about $18 million worth of the memecoin, and was awarded a “Trump Golden Tourbillion” watch, according to CNN. By all accounts, the attendees did not get their money’s worth out of the event. YouTuber CoffeeZilla, an investigative journalist in the crypto space, said he was told by attendees that the event was disappointing and “wack.” Christoph Heuermann, a “serial entrepreneur” who attended the event, said in an Instagram post that Trump gave a 20-minute speech and “didn’t interact with the crowd other than enjoying being celebrated. Even VIP token holders (I know some) couldn’t speak or even shake hands with the president.” Don’t worry, though: If you thought that was meant as a criticism of the whole charade, it wasn’t. “It was still well worth it to experience the president live and watch his mightily secured arrival and departure,” Heuermann wrote. Trump’s short speech—which he made in front of the official presidential seal despite the White House claiming it was a “private” event—seemed to be a classic rambling “weave” of an address, recounting his 2024 presidential election victory and bragging about closing the southern border in between the occasion bit of red meat tossed to the crypto crowd, according to CNN. “The Biden administration persecuted crypto innovators, and we’re bringing them back into the USA where they belong,” he told the audience, per Fox News. As Trump welcomed the folks who are actively lining his pockets, protesters stood outside the gates of the Trump National Golf Club, denouncing the event as evidence of corruption and demanding the full guest list be released, according to the New York Times. Democrats have launched several efforts to force the President (and other politicians) to divest from cryptocurrency so they cannot use their office to profit through promotions like this. But until one of those bills actually goes somewhere, it seems like there are still plenty of people out there willing to give Trump money in exchange for little more than clout (and maybe a pardon down the line, if needed). Daily Newsletter You May Also Like By Vanessa Taylor Published May 23, 2025 By Lucas Ropek Published May 23, 2025 By Matt Novak Published May 22, 2025 By AJ Dellinger Published May 22, 2025 By Matt Novak Published May 22, 2025 By Ellyn Lapointe Published May 21, 2025

Fireworks burst in the background behind a Bradley fighting vehicle at the 2019 Salute to America event that was initially supposed to be a military parade. Sarah Silbiger/Getty Images 2025-05-21T21:31:44Z Save Saved Read in app This story is available exclusively to Business Insider subscribers. Become an Insider and start reading now. Have an account? The Army is preparing for a massive 250th birthday parade in Washington, DC, on June 14. The event, designated a national security special event, coincides with President Donald Trump's birthday. The parade will feature tanks, aircraft, and 6,700 soldiers from all Army units. The US Army has shared new details for its massive 250th birthday celebration, which is set to be a mind-boggling logistical feat, with Abrams tanks, artillery, Strykers, horses, and a lot more descending on the nation's capital.The week-long celebratory event is officially designated as a "national security special event," a term used for major events like the Super Bowl or presidential inaugurations. These require extensive inter-agency coordination.This event has been in the works for two years, but was only recently updated to include a parade on June 14 that will coincide with President Donald Trump's birthday. Army officials on Wednesday did not specify to reporters whose idea it was to insert the military parade into the already-planned events.Trump made it known during his first term that he wanted a major military parade. That event never came to fruition.At least 200,000 people are expected to attend the upcoming event, officials said.The parade will start in the early evening and will proceed along Constitution Avenue and continue near the National Mall, a shorter route than previously expected.Here's what's coming to DC for the parade:There will be 28 M1A1 Abrams tanks, each roughly 70-ton tracked vehicle equipped with a 120mm cannon, among other armaments, as well as 28 Bradley Fighting vehicles, lighter tracked armor with 25mm M242 Bushmaster chain guns. Additionally, 28 Strykers will also be included, flexible 20-ton eight-wheeled vehicles with mixed armaments used for a range of missions.Abrams tanks, Strykers, and Bradley infantry fighting vehicles form the backbone of two of the three types of Army "brigade combat teams," self-sufficient units that can fight and maneuver on the battlefield. Some are centered on infantry, others on "armor" like the Abrams and Bradley, and others on the versatile Strykers. A Bradley fighting vehicle sits as a static display at the 2019 Salute to America event. BRENDAN SMIALOWSKI/AFP via Getty Images The parade will also feature 4 Paladins, tracked self-propelled 155mm howitzers each weighing over 27 tons. There will also be "several" pieces of towed artillery including M777s and M119s. Fifty aircraft are expected to participate, including helicopters like the multi-mission Black Hawks, heavy-lift Chinooks, and attack Apaches. Army officials told reporters they are working closely with the FAA and DC's Reagan National Airport for parade flyover deconfliction, though final details regarding impact to local airports are still being hashed out.All weapons systems will be disabled and inspected by the Secret Service prior to the event, officials told reporters. No ammunition, be it blank or live rounds, will be distributed to soldiers.Roughly 6,700 soldiers — including active duty, reserve, National Guard, Reserve Officer Training Corps (ROTC), and special operations forces — are expected to participate.Some soldiers will wear historical uniforms specially made for this event, officials shared Wednesday, to reflect US Army traditions from the Revolutionary War through the Global War on Terror.World War II-era equipment including M4 Sherman tanks, B25 bombers, P51 Mustang fighter planes, and C47 Skytrains, will also be featured.Army equine units from across the country are also expected, including Arlington National Cemetery's Caisson Platoon.The Army's prestigious Golden Knights parachute team will end the celebration with a jump and will present a folded flag to the president. Folded flags are usually presented to grieving military families during funerals, but they are also sometimes presented at military retirement ceremonies or other milestone events as a gesture of respect.

Editor’s note, May 21, 2025, at 9:50 am ET: The Senate has unanimously passed the “no tax on tips” bill. The bill will now head to the House. This article was originally published on August 13, 2024.First, some good news: In an otherwise polarizing and divisive election, there’s at least one policy proposal that’s emerging as a unifying issue. The bad news is that most experts think it’s a terrible idea. The proposal in question is to abolish federal taxes on tips. Donald Trump originally floated the idea at a campaign rally in June, and it gained enough traction that “No tax on tips” signs started making regular appearances at Trump campaign events and the Republican National Convention. Now, even his opponent Vice President Kamala Harris has endorsed the idea. “It is my promise to everyone here: When I am president, we will continue our fight for working families of America, including to raise the minimum wage and eliminate taxes on tips for service and hospitality workers,” she told a crowd over the weekend.In a series of social media posts, Trump accused Harris of stealing his idea, saying that “she sounds more like Trump than Trump, copying almost everything.”On the surface, exempting tips from being taxed might sound like a pro-worker proposal with populist appeal, potentially boosting take-home pay for service sector workers who rely on tips to make a living. But the policy doesn’t really hold up under any scrutiny. And that’s because at best, “no tax on tips” looks a lot less like a tax cut for low- and middle-income families, and a lot more like a subsidy for big businesses. “I’m not at all saying that workers won’t get anything,” said Heidi Shierholz, president of the Economic Policy Institute. “But I think that a meaningful share of the [federal] expenditures on a tax exemption like this will go to the employers of tipped workers.” That might be why industry lobbyists have backed the proposal. “It’s not a surprise that the National Restaurant Association loves this,” Shierholz said, referring to the lobbying group that represents many of the country’s major restaurant chains.At worst, the tax policy might even put a downward pressure on service sector wages by allowing employers to keep their workers’ baseline pay low because the tax cut could instead raise the workers’ take-home pay.“I think there is no question that it would” weigh wages down, Shierholz said. The only question, she says, is just how much.So while “no tax on tips” might make for a good sound bite or campaign slogan, it doesn’t necessarily translate to wise policymaking.Tipped workers don’t need a tax cut. They need a raise.The problem with tipped wages is not that they are taxed too heavily; it’s how little they tend to pay, and how much tipped workers have to rely on the kindness of strangers to make ends meet. In 2023, for example, the median annual wage for waiters was just below $32,000, according to the Bureau of Labor Statistics.In fact, as the Tax Policy Center put it, eliminating income taxes on tips would do little, if anything, for many tipped workers whose earnings are so low that they are already exempt from paying federal income taxes.“It’s very hard to dispute that the vast majority of moderate and low-wage workers are left out,” said Brendan Duke, senior director of economic policy at the Center for American Progress. “We know that 95 percent of low- and moderate-wage workers don’t get tips, and only about a third of those tipped workers pay income taxes and would benefit from this.” (Duke was specifically talking about Texas Senator Ted Cruz’s proposed legislation on this issue.)Part of the reason that tipped workers are paid so poorly is that the federal government only guarantees them a subminimum wage of $2.13 per hour. If along with tips, a worker’s earnings are still below the federal minimum wage of $7.25 per hour, then employers have to make up the difference. (Many states and municipalities have wage requirements above the federal minimum, but those also often include carve-outs with lower hourly minimums for tipped workers.)That’s why a handful of states have abolished the subminimum wage for tipped workers altogether. Because by allowing employers to pay tipped workers less, businesses essentially pass their payroll burden directly onto their customers. And while most Americans are used to paying tips, those who don’t — or those who at least threaten to not tip — create a hostile environment for workers and make it harder for employees to make a fair wage. Some studies have also shown that tipped wages encourage workers to discriminate against people of color, providing them with worse service because of racist stereotypes about who is more likely to leave a generous tip.Eliminating taxes on tips is a handout for businesses, not workersOne of the biggest concerns about doing away with federal taxes on tips is that it would discourage businesses from offering more competitive wages. That’s because if workers’ take-home pay increases because of a tax cut, employers wouldn’t need to provide tipped workers a higher base-line wage. In effect, it’s a tax cut that might mostly subsidize businesses’ payroll costs, not workers’ cost of living. “It will reduce employers’ needs to raise wages,” Shierholz, of the Economic Policy Institute, said. There’s also the fact that creating a tax carveout for tipped employees could create a major loophole for employers looking to pay people less. Some sectors, for example, can simply become part of the tipped economy, making more of their workers rely on tips rather than a minimum wage.The policy would “incentivize employers to have more workers be in tipped occupations,” Shierholz said. “[Employers] could reduce the base wages they pay their workers under the guise of doing something for the workers. They could say, ‘We’re making you tipped because you won’t have to pay taxes’ and then in the fine print, it’s like, ‘Oh also, you’re going to be making $2.13 an hour in base wages.’”That’s why pursuing other policies, like abolishing the subminimum wage, would do much more to increase workers’ pay than eliminating taxes on tips would. The poverty rate for tipped workers in states without a subminimum wage, for example, is lower than that in states with a subminimum wage. “If you really want to help tipped workers, there are other ways that are far, far better,” Shierholz said, adding that federal dollars would be better directed toward programs like the Child Tax Credit or the Earned Income Tax Credit, which would be much better at targeting workers who need it. So if politicians are looking to tout a pro-worker agenda, they should point to policies that can actually raise people’s wages, as Harris did by also endorsing raising the minimum wage. Otherwise, they might just be pushing for yet another tax cut for the rich. After all, that might be why major business lobbying groups have endorsed “no tax on tips” — to avoid actually raising workers’ wages.See More:

Friend requests Meta hypes AI friends as social media’s future, but users want real connections Two visions for social media’s future pit real connections against AI friends. Ashley Belanger – May 21, 2025 9:38 am | 1 Credit: Aurich Lawson | Getty Images Credit: Aurich Lawson | Getty Images Story text Size Small Standard Large Width * Standard Wide Links Standard Orange * Subscribers only   Learn more If you ask the man who has largely shaped how friends and family connect on social media over the past two decades about the future of social media, you may not get a straight answer. At the Federal Trade Commission's monopoly trial, Meta CEO Mark Zuckerberg attempted what seemed like an artful dodge to avoid criticism that his company allegedly bought out rivals Instagram and WhatsApp to lock users into Meta's family of apps so they would never post about their personal lives anywhere else. He testified that people actually engage with social media less often these days to connect with loved ones, preferring instead to discover entertaining content on platforms to share in private messages with friends and family. As Zuckerberg spins it, Meta no longer perceives much advantage in dominating the so-called personal social networking market where Facebook made its name and cemented what the FTC alleged is an illegal monopoly. "Mark Zuckerberg says social media is over," a New Yorker headline said about this testimony in a report noting a Meta chart that seemed to back up Zuckerberg's words. That chart, shared at the trial, showed the "percent of time spent viewing content posted by 'friends'" had declined over the past two years, from 22 to 17 percent on Facebook and from 11 to 7 percent on Instagram. Supposedly because of this trend, Zuckerberg testified that "it doesn't matter much" if someone's friends are on their preferred platform. Every platform has its own value as a discovery engine, Zuckerberg suggested. And Meta platforms increasingly compete on this new playing field against rivals like TikTok, Meta argued, while insisting that it's not so much focused on beating the FTC's flagged rivals in the connecting-friends-and-family business, Snap and MeWe. But while Zuckerberg claims that hosting that kind of content doesn't move the needle much anymore, owning the biggest platforms that people use daily to connect with friends and family obviously still matters to Meta, MeWe founder Mark Weinstein told Ars. And Meta's own press releases seem to back that up. Weeks ahead of Zuckerberg's testimony, Meta announced that it would bring back the "magic of friends," introducing a "friends" tab to Facebook to make user experiences more like the original Facebook. The company intentionally diluted feeds with creator content and ads for the past two years, but it now appears intent on trying to spark more real conversations between friends and family, at least partly to fuel its newly launched AI chatbots. Those chatbots mine personal information shared on Facebook and Instagram, and Meta wants to use that data to connect more personally with users—but "in a very creepy way," The Washington Post wrote. In interviews, Zuckerberg has suggested these AI friends could "meaningfully" fill the void of real friendship online, as the average person has only three friends but "has demand" for up to 15. To critics seeking to undo Meta's alleged monopoly, this latest move could signal a contradiction in Zuckerberg's testimony, showing that the company is so invested in keeping users on its platforms that it's now creating AI friends (wh0 can never leave its platform) to bait the loneliest among us into more engagement. "The average person wants more connectivity, connection, than they have," Zuckerberg said, hyping AI friends. For the Facebook founder, it must be hard to envision a future where his platforms aren't the answer to providing that basic social need. All this comes more than a decade after he sought $5 billion in Facebook's 2012 initial public offering so that he could keep building tools that he told investors would expand "people's capacity to build and maintain relationships." At the trial, Zuckerberg testified that AI and augmented reality will be key fixtures of Meta's platforms in the future, predicting that "several years from now, you are going to be scrolling through your feed, and not only is it going to be sort of animated, but it will be interactive." Meta declined to comment further on the company's vision for social media's future. In a statement, a Meta spokesperson told Ars that "the FTC’s lawsuit against Meta defies reality," claiming that it threatens US leadership in AI and insisting that evidence at trial would establish that platforms like TikTok, YouTube, and X are Meta's true rivals. "More than 10 years after the FTC reviewed and cleared our acquisitions, the Commission’s action in this case sends the message that no deal is ever truly final," Meta's spokesperson said. "Regulators should be supporting American innovation rather than seeking to break up a great American company and further advantaging China on critical issues like AI.” Meta faces calls to open up its platforms Weinstein, the MeWe founder, told Ars that back in the 1990s when the original social media founders were planning the first community portals, "it was so beautiful because we didn't think about bots and trolls. We didn't think about data mining and surveillance capitalism. We thought about making the world a more connected and holistic place." But those who became social media overlords found more money in walled gardens and increasingly cut off attempts by outside developers to improve the biggest platforms' functionality or leverage their platforms to compete for their users' attention. Born of this era, Weinstein expects that Zuckerberg, and therefore Meta, will always cling to its friends-and-family roots, no matter which way Zuckerberg says the wind is blowing. Meta "is still entirely based on personal social networking," Weinstein told Ars. In a Newsweek op-ed, Weinstein explained that he left MeWe in 2021 after "competition became impossible" with Meta. It was a time when MeWe faced backlash over lax content moderation, drawing comparisons between its service and right-wing apps like Gab or Parler. Weinstein rejected those comparisons, seeing his platform as an ideal Facebook rival and remaining a board member through the app's more recent shift to decentralization. Still defending MeWe's failed efforts to beat Facebook, he submitted hundreds of documents and was deposed in the monopoly trial, alleging that Meta retaliated against MeWe as a privacy-focused rival that sought to woo users away by branding itself the "anti-Facebook." Among his complaints, Weinstein accused Meta of thwarting MeWe's attempts to introduce interoperability between the two platforms, which he thinks stems from a fear that users might leave Facebook if they discover a more appealing platform. That’s why he's urged the FTC—if it wins its monopoly case—to go beyond simply ordering a potential breakup of Facebook, Instagram, and WhatsApp to also require interoperability between Meta's platforms and all rivals. That may be the only way to force Meta to release its clutch on personal data collection, Weinstein suggested, and allow for more competition broadly in the social media industry. "The glue that holds it all together is Facebook’s monopoly over data," Weinstein wrote in a Wall Street Journal op-ed, recalling the moment he realized that Meta seemed to have an unbeatable monopoly. "Its ownership and control of the personal information of Facebook users and non-users alike is unmatched." Cory Doctorow, a special advisor to the Electronic Frontier Foundation, told Ars that his vision of a better social media future goes even further than requiring interoperability between all platforms. Social networks like Meta's should also be made to allow reverse engineering so that outside developers can modify their apps with third-party tools without risking legal attacks, he said. Doctorow said that solution would create "an equilibrium where companies are more incentivized to behave themselves than they are to cheat" by, say, retaliating against, killing off, or buying out rivals. And "if they fail to respond to that incentive and they cheat anyways, then the rest of the world still has a remedy," Doctorow said, by having the choice to modify or ditch any platform deemed toxic, invasive, manipulative, or otherwise offensive. Doctorow summed up the frustration that some users have faced through the ongoing "enshittification" of platforms (a term he coined) ever since platforms took over the Internet. "I'm 55 now, and I've gotten a lot less interested in how things work because I've had too many experiences with how things fail," Doctorow told Ars. "And I just want to make sure that if I'm on a service and it goes horribly wrong, I can leave." Social media haters wish OG platforms were doomed Weinstein pointed out that Meta's alleged monopoly impacts a group often left out of social media debates: non-users. And if you ask someone who hates social media what the future of social media should look like, they will not mince words: They want a way to opt out of all of it. As Meta's monopoly trial got underway, a personal blog post titled "No Instagram, no privacy" rose to the front page of Hacker News, prompting a discussion about social media norms and reasonable expectations for privacy in 2025. In the post, Wouter-Jan Leys, a privacy advocate, explained that he felt "blessed" to have "somehow escaped having an Instagram account," feeling no pressure to "update the abstract audience of everyone I ever connected with online on where I am, what I am doing, or who I am hanging out with." But despite never having an account, he's found that "you don’t have to be on Instagram to be on Instagram," complaining that "it bugs me" when friends seem to know "more about my life than I tell them" because of various friends' posts that mention or show images of him. In his blog, he defined privacy as "being in control of what other people know about you" and suggested that because of platforms like Instagram, he currently lacked this control. There should be some way to "fix or regulate this," Leys suggested, or maybe some universal "etiquette where it’s frowned upon to post about social gatherings to any audience beyond who already was at that gathering." On Hacker News, his post spurred a debate over one of the longest-running privacy questions swirling on social media: Is it OK to post about someone who abstains from social media? Some seeming social media fans scolded Leys for being so old-fashioned about social media, suggesting, "just live your life without being so bothered about offending other people" or saying that "the entire world doesn't have to be sanitized to meet individual people's preferences." Others seemed to better understand Leys' point of view, with one agreeing that "the problem is that our modern norms (and tech) lead to everyone sharing everything with a large social network." Surveying the lively thread, another social media hater joked, "I feel vindicated for my decision to entirely stay off of this drama machine." Leys told Ars that he would "absolutely" be in favor of personal social networks like Meta's platforms dying off or losing steam, as Zuckerberg suggested they already are. He thinks that the decline in personal post engagement that Meta is seeing is likely due to a combination of factors, where some users may prefer more privacy now after years of broadcasting their lives, and others may be tired of the pressure of building a personal brand or experiencing other "odd social dynamics." Setting user sentiments aside, Meta is also responsible for people engaging with fewer of their friends' posts. Meta announced that it would double the amount of force-fed filler in people's feeds on Instagram and Facebook starting in 2023. That's when the two-year span begins that Zuckerberg measured in testifying about the sudden drop-off in friends' content engagement. So while it's easy to say the market changed, Meta may be obscuring how much it shaped that shift. Degrading the newsfeed and changing Instagram's default post shape from square to rectangle seemingly significantly shifted Instagram social norms, for example, creating an environment where Gen Z users felt less comfortable posting as prolifically as millennials did when Instagram debuted, The New Yorker explained last year. Where once millennials painstakingly designed immaculate grids of individual eye-catching photos to seem cool online, Gen Z users told The New Yorker that posting a single photo now feels "humiliating" and like a "social risk." But rather than eliminate the impulse to post, this cultural shift has popularized a different form of personal posting: staggered photo dumps, where users wait to post a variety of photos together to sum up a month of events or curate a vibe, the trend piece explained. And Meta is clearly intent on fueling that momentum, doubling the maximum number of photos that users can feature in a single post to encourage even more social posting, The New Yorker noted. Brendan Benedict, an attorney for Benedict Law Group PLLC who has helped litigate big tech antitrust cases, is monitoring the FTC monopoly trial on a Substack called Big Tech on Trial. He told Ars that the evidence at the trial has shown that "consumers want more friends and family content, and Meta is belatedly trying to address this" with features like the "friends" tab, while claiming there's less interest in this content. Leys doesn't think social media—at least the way that Facebook defined it in the mid-2000s—will ever die, because people will never stop wanting social networks like Facebook or Instagram to stay connected with all their friends and family. But he could see a world where, if people ever started truly caring about privacy or "indeed [got] tired of the social dynamics and personal brand-building... the kind of social media like Facebook and Instagram will have been a generational phenomenon, and they may not immediately bounce back," especially if it's easy to switch to other platforms that respond better to user preferences. He also agreed that requiring interoperability would likely lead to better social media products, but he maintained that "it would still not get me on Instagram." Interoperability shakes up social media Meta thought it may have already beaten the FTC's monopoly case, filing for a motion for summary judgment after the FTC rested its case in a bid to end the trial early. That dream was quickly dashed when the judge denied the motion days later. But no matter the outcome of the trial, Meta's influence over the social media world may be waning just as it's facing increasing pressure to open up its platforms more than ever. The FTC has alleged that Meta weaponized platform access early on, only allowing certain companies to interoperate and denying access to anyone perceived as a threat to its alleged monopoly power. That includes limiting promotions of Instagram to keep users engaged with Facebook Blue. A primary concern for Meta (then Facebook), the FTC claimed, was avoiding "training users to check multiple feeds," which might allow other apps to "cannibalize" its users. "Facebook has used this power to deter and suppress competitive threats to its personal social networking monopoly. In order to protect its monopoly, Facebook adopted and required developers to agree to conditional dealing policies that limited third-party apps’ ability to engage with Facebook rivals or to develop into rivals themselves," the FTC alleged. By 2011, the FTC alleged, then-Facebook had begun terminating API access to any developers that made it easier to export user data into a competing social network without Facebook's permission. That practice only ended when the UK parliament started calling out Facebook’s anticompetitive conduct toward app developers in 2018, the FTC alleged. According to the FTC, Meta continues "to this day" to "screen developers and can weaponize API access in ways that cement its dominance," and if scrutiny ever subsides, Meta is expected to return to such anticompetitive practices as the AI race heats up. One potential hurdle for Meta could be that the push for interoperability is not just coming from the FTC or lawmakers who recently reintroduced bipartisan legislation to end walled gardens. Doctorow told Ars that "huge public groundswells of mistrust and anger about excessive corporate power" that "cross political lines" are prompting global antitrust probes into big tech companies and are perhaps finally forcing a reckoning after years of degrading popular products to chase higher and higher revenues. For social media companies, mounting concerns about privacy and suspicions about content manipulation or censorship are driving public distrust, Doctorow said, as well as fears of surveillance capitalism. The latter includes theories that Doctorow is skeptical of. Weinstein embraced them, though, warning that platforms seem to be profiting off data without consent while brainwashing users. Allowing users to leave the platform without losing access to their friends, their social posts, and their messages might be the best way to incentivize Meta to either genuinely compete for billions of users or lose them forever as better options pop up that can plug into their networks. In his Newsweek op-ed, Weinstein suggested that web inventor Tim Berners-Lee has already invented a working protocol "to enable people to own, upload, download, and relocate their social graphs," which maps users' connections across platforms. That could be used to mitigate "the network effect" that locks users into platforms like Meta's "while interrupting unwanted data collection." At the same time, Doctorow told Ars that increasingly popular decentralized platforms like Bluesky and Mastodon already provide interoperability and are next looking into "building interoperable gateways" between their services. Doctorow said that communicating with other users across platforms may feel "awkward" at first, but ultimately, it may be like "having to find the diesel pump at the gas station" instead of the unleaded gas pump. "You'll still be going to the same gas station," Doctorow suggested. Opening up gateways into all platforms could be useful in the future, Doctorow suggested. Imagine if one platform goes down—it would no longer disrupt communications as drastically, as users could just pivot to communicate on another platform and reach the same audience. The same goes for platforms that users grow to distrust. The EFF supports regulators' attempts to pass well-crafted interoperability mandates, Doctorow said, noting that "if you have to worry about your users leaving, you generally have to treat them better." But would interoperability fix social media? The FTC has alleged that "Facebook’s dominant position in the US personal social networking market is durable due to significant entry barriers, including direct network effects and high switching costs." Meta disputes the FTC's complaint as outdated, arguing that its platform could be substituted by pretty much any social network. However, Guy Aridor, a co-author of a recent article called "The Economics of Social Media" in the Journal of Economic Literature, told Ars that dominant platforms are probably threatened by shifting social media trends and are likely to remain "resistant to interoperability" because "it’s in the interest of the platform to make switching and coordination costs high so that users are less likely to migrate away." For Meta, research shows its platforms' network effects have appeared to weaken somewhat but "clearly still exist" despite social media users increasingly seeking content on platforms rather than just socialization, Aridor said. Interoperability advocates believe it will make it easier for startups to compete with giants like Meta, which fight hard and sometimes seemingly dirty to keep users on their apps. Reintroducing the ACCESS Act, which requires platform compatibility to enable service switching, Senator Mark R. Warner (D-Va.) said that "interoperability and portability are powerful tools to promote innovative new companies and limit anti-competitive behaviors." He's hoping that passing these "long-overdue requirements" will "boost competition and give consumers more power." Aridor told Ars it's obvious that "interoperability would clearly increase competition," but he still has questions about whether users would benefit from that competition "since one consistent theme is that these platforms are optimized to maximize engagement, and there’s numerous empirical evidence we have by now that engagement isn’t necessarily correlated with utility." Consider, Aridor suggested, how toxic content often leads to high engagement but lower user satisfaction, as MeWe experienced during its 2021 backlash. Aridor said there is currently "very little empirical evidence on the effects of interoperability," but theoretically, if it increased competition in the current climate, it would likely "push the market more toward supplying engaging entertainment-related content as opposed to friends and family type of content." Benedict told Ars that a remedy like interoperability would likely only be useful to combat Meta's alleged monopoly following a breakup, which he views as the "natural remedy" following a potential win in the FTC's lawsuit. Without the breakup and other meaningful reforms, a Meta win could preserve the status quo and see the company never open up its platforms, perhaps perpetuating Meta's influence over social media well into the future. And if Zuckerberg's vision comes to pass, instead of seeing what your friends are posting on interoperating platforms across the Internet, you may have a dozen AI friends trained on your real friends' behaviors sending you regular dopamine hits to keep you scrolling on Facebook or Instagram. Aridor's team's article suggested that, regardless of user preferences, social media remains a permanent fixture of society. If that's true, users could get stuck forever using whichever platforms connect them with the widest range of contacts. "While social media has continued to evolve, one thing that has not changed is that social media remains a central part of people’s lives," his team's article concluded. Ashley Belanger Senior Policy Reporter Ashley Belanger Senior Policy Reporter Ashley is a senior policy reporter for Ars Technica, dedicated to tracking social impacts of emerging policies and new technologies. She is a Chicago-based journalist with 20 years of experience. 1 Comments

By Ellyn Lapointe Published May 21, 2025 | Comments (0) | A young male white-faced capuchin carries a baby howler monkey on its back, captured by a remote camera trap on Jicarón Island © Brendan Barrett / Max Planck Institute of Animal Behavior A young male capuchin named Joker may just be the world’s first primate influencer. But the trend he started—abducting babies belonging to a separate species—has deadly consequences. Joker is one of many white-faced capuchins living on Jicarón Island off the coast of Panama. Researchers had been using cameras to observe the behavior of these round-headed, stocky monkeys when, in 2022, something unusual caught the eye of Zoë Goldsborough, a doctoral researcher at the Max Planck Institute and a research associate at the Smithsonian Tropical Research Institute in Panama.  She was scrolling through camera-trap footage when she spotted a male capuchin carrying a baby monkey on its back. This was already an unusual sight—female primates are almost always the ones to carry the young. But upon closer inspection, it got even stranger. “I really quickly saw that the coloration was completely wrong,” Goldsborough told Gizmodo. “The capuchin monkeys have dark fur and light face, and this [baby] had lighter fur and a dark face.” The only other primates on the island are howler monkeys, and this infant’s coloration matched that species, she explained. “So it was really quickly clear that it could only be a howler monkey, but that just made no sense whatsoever.” This sighting inspired Goldsborough to sift through tens of thousands of images captured by all cameras deployed around the same time period, according to a statement from the Max Planck Institute. She found four different instances of the same capuchin, a male who she named Joker, carrying baby howler monkeys. “With everything we found, we had more answers, but also more questions,” Goldsborough said.  At first, she and her colleagues thought this behavior could be a form of adoption—when an animal assumes a parental role for an infant of another species. It’s relatively common among primates, but almost exclusively carried out by females who presumably do it to practice caring for young, according to the Max Planck Institute. So what was motivating Joker—a male—to kidnap these baby howlers? Before Goldsborough and her colleagues could begin to answer that question, new ones arose. They discovered video and images of four more young male capuchins carrying baby howlers, five months after Joker started doing it. They were copying him—it was a real-world case of “monkey see, monkey do.” The researchers’ study, published Monday in the journal Current Biology, details how the trend-setting Joker and his four followers carried 11 different howler infants over the course of 15 months. The babies clung to their backs or bellies as the capuchins went about their business, sticking together for up to nine days at a time. Aside from some occasional annoyance when the infants tried and failed to nurse, Goldsborough said the capuchins were gentle with their strange passengers—Joker especially. “He seems to be really interested in having these infants and carrying them for long periods of time,” she said.  But because these males could not produce milk, the infants didn’t fare well with their adoptive fathers. The researchers saw four babies die from apparent malnourishment, and suspect the others perished as well. In three cases, the capuchins continued to carry their dead infant for at least a day after it had passed. Based on their findings, the researchers determined that this was a case of interspecies abduction, not adoption. It’s not yet clear why the capuchins picked up this trend, as it is rare for primates to kidnap the young of other species, but it’s not uncommon for one individual’s behavior to spread to other members of the population through social learning. As for why Joker initiated the behavior in the first place, Goldsborough says there are a few possible motivations. His remarkably gentle interactions with the howler babies suggest he may have had some sort of caring motivation, she explained. “I think it’s possible that there was something a little quirky about him, or that he was kind of lonely in a way,” she said.  To get to the root of his behavior, Goldsborough wants to learn more about his social position. Determining whether Joker is a leader or a loner could provide further insights into how social learning manifests in primate groups, she said. Daily Newsletter You May Also Like By Ed Cara Published May 15, 2025 By Isaac Schultz Published May 6, 2025 By Isaac Schultz Published May 5, 2025 By Ed Cara Published April 25, 2025 By George Dvorsky Published March 21, 2025 By Ed Cara Published February 28, 2025

"My rough plan on the White House is to be there for a couple days every few weeks," Elon Musk said. Brendan Smialowski/AFP via Getty Images 2025-05-21T07:45:58Z Save Saved Read in app This story is available exclusively to Business Insider subscribers. Become an Insider and start reading now. Have an account? Elon Musk told investors he plans to spend more time on Tesla than DOGE. But Musk is not saying goodbye to Washington just yet. Musk said he will be at the White House "every few weeks." Elon Musk is scaling back his involvement with the White House DOGE office, but he's not saying goodbye to Washington yet.Musk was speaking to CNBC's David Faber in an interview on Tuesday when he was asked if he would miss being in the White House."My rough plan on the White House is to be there for a couple days every few weeks. And to be helpful where I can be helpful," Musk told Faber.Musk told investors in an earnings call for Tesla last month that "the major work of establishing the Department of Government Efficiency" was done, and he would focus more on the car company.Investors have repeatedly asked Musk to spend more time on Tesla instead of DOGE, after Musk's work at the cost-cutting outfit sparked protests and boycotts against the company.Tesla has seen declining sales in European markets while facing increased competition from Chinese automakers like BYD. Tesla's stock is down nearly 15% this year.Last month, President Donald Trump said he expects Musk to leave his administration "in a few months." Trump later told reporters in a Cabinet meeting at the White House that he doesn't really need Musk in his administration."Elon has done a fantastic job. Look, he's sitting here, and I don't care. I don't need Elon for anything other than I happen to like him," Trump said on April 10.In a separate interview with Bloomberg on Tuesday, Musk said he will reduce his political spending. In last year's elections, Musk spent at least $277 million supporting Trump and other GOP candidates."In terms of political spending, I'm going to do a lot less in the future," Musk told Bloomberg. "I think I've done enough."Representatives for Musk at Tesla did not respond to a request for comment from Business Insider. Recommended video