• Paramount has agreed a $16 million settlement over a lawsuit filed by President Donald Trump.
• The suit alleged that an interview on CBS' "60 Minutes" with presidential rival Kamala Harris was selectively edited.
• Paramount said its settlement did not include an apology or statement of regret.

Paramount has agreed to pay $16 million to settle a lawsuit filed by President Donald Trump, it said late Tuesday night.

The suit, filed in October, alleged that an interview with Trump's presidential rival, Kamala Harris, aired on CBS' "60 Minutes," had been selectively edited to "tip the scales in favor of the Democratic party" during November's election.

Paramount said in its statement that it would also cover the president's legal fees, and agreed to release transcripts of interviews with presidential candidates in the future.

Its statement did not include an apology or a statement of regret.

More follows …

• Sandy Yawn has worked in yachting for more than three decades.
• She says that as a woman, she had to work harder to prove herself in the industry.
• The Below Deck Mediterranean star shared advice with BI for other women in male-dominated fields.

This as-told-to essay is based on a transcribed conversation with Sandy Yawn, a superyacht captain and star of 'Below Deck Mediterranean.' The following has been edited for length and clarity.

When I started my yachting career more than 30 years ago, I'd never seen a woman captain.

Women worked on ships, but they were few and far between in the world of yachts, and I'd never seen one at the helm.

I fell into yachting, or maybe the job found me. When I started working maintenance on boats, I had no idea yachting could be a career. Decades later, I'm a superyacht captain. I want to create opportunities for other women to get into this industry.

For a long time, I didn't have any female role models

I first became a yachtie after getting sober in 1989 and working the 12-step program. I just needed a job.

I knew nothing about yachting as a profession. I answered a classified ad for a job maintaining boats in Fort Lauderdale. The owner of one of the boats I worked on offered me a full-time position as a crew member.

When I started working on boats, I didn't have any female role models. Instead, the people I admired were the ones working on themselves in recovery on my 12-step program.

My first real role model within the industry was a male captain. He taught me about maritime finance and how to drive a boat, and eventually, he paid for me to go to sea school, where I began working toward my maritime license. He took a chance on me, and I was hungry to learn.

I wanted to change my life, and I did whatever it took to succeed. I started out as a deck crew member and worked my way up. In many ways, my biggest motivator was my hunger.

As a woman, you absolutely have to work harder

Many years later, I finally met a woman in the industry who inspired me. By then, I was already a captain, but she was running a much bigger vessel.

I remember watching her take the boat out of the marina at the Monaco Boat Show.

I felt so proud to see a woman at the helm of a 240-foot boat. I thought to myself, "One day, I want to do the job she has."

She later told me that when she pulled into Antibes, in the south of France, all the men on the docks were watching her. They were waiting to see if she'd crash and fail.

I've experienced that same judgment. Facing that kind of resistance only made me want to work even harder.

Becoming a captain was difficult, but I knew I could do it. I had to log a lot of sea time, and the test wasn't easy. I hadn't been to school in years, and I'd been kicked out of 11th grade. But I found the process fascinating. I was learning, and I loved it.

Below Deck was a great opportunity

Initially, when I was approached about Below Deck, I'd already been a captain for more than 20 years.

I wasn't going to do the show because I thought it would ruin my career. All my friends advised me not to do it, worried that we were professionals and the show would highlight the salacious stuff.

But I thought it was a good opportunity, and told myself I could always walk away if I wanted. It was the best thing because we've shown the world the career opportunities in yachting and that women can lead in them.

Below Deck has been the best. The global exposure and the chance to show women that there are real careers in this industry have been so important. After all, I never knew it existed.

For women trying to forge a career in any male-dominated field, my advice is to take all the classes you can and learn every skill available to you. You can walk into the space with all that knowledge and continue to learn.

Teaching younger yachties

With some young people, it's all about the experience and not putting in the time to learn. When I find someone who is interested in learning and shows initiative, I invest in them.

I make it clear I'm willing to teach them. A lot of captains don't allow the crew on the bridge, but I usually bring one person up to be a watch officer. This is when you can teach them things while working, like an apprenticeship program.

However, I won't let people on the bridge if I'm navigating, as I need to be focused.

My advice for other women wanting to become captains is to start off on small boats. That's where the real problem-solving happens.

On big boats, the engineers solve the problems, but on smaller vessels, you do everything yourself. In my case, I read manuals on every piece of equipment because I didn't want to rely on calling out a technician to come save me.

It teaches you to be self-reliant and practical.

• A Ukrainian company teamed with a UK contractor to bring its battle-tested drone to the UK market.
• Ukraine has become ground zero for developing cutting-edge drones.
• UK-Ukraine tech-sharing aims to enhance military capabilities and retain an edge.

The dizzying pace of drone development is now part and parcel of the war in Ukraine, where the fastest-moving companies are battle-testing their products in real-world combat.

Increasingly, Western militaries understand that their drone tech will be functionally obsolete unless the technology they import or develop is field-tested in conflicts like Ukraine.

"If your system is not in day-to-day use on the frontline of Ukraine, it becomes very quickly out of date," Justin Hedges, a former Royal Marine and cofounder of military intelligence company Prevail, told Business Insider.

Prevail has partnered with Ukrainian drone company Skyeton to bring Raybird, a small surveillance and targeting drone, to production in the UK.

It's being done with a shrewd eye on the British Army's plans to replace its troubled Watchkeeper drone program with an uncrewed surveillance and targeting capability more suited to the scenarios playing out in Ukraine.

More broadly, a recent data and drone tech-sharing agreement made between Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy and the UK's Prime Minister Keir Starmer said that Ukrainian insight is to be "plugged into UK production lines."

It chimes with a drive across the West to see the Ukrainian battlefield as a live laboratory — out of necessity for the country's defense, but increasingly, as a crucial way for smaller companies to develop systems and services that have a technological edge.

The UK armed forces minister Luke Pollard underscored the point at a drone conference in Latvia in late May, saying, "If you are a drone company and you do not have your kit on the frontline in Ukraine, you might as well give up."

Raybird, Skyeton's drone, has a combined 350,000 hours of flight time on Ukraine's front line, in use "from the Black Sea to Kharkiv," Skyeton's founder Alex Stepura told BI.

Per Stepura, Raybird can fly more than 28 continuous hours and uses an array of sensors — including optical, electromagnetic, and various radar capabilities — to collect data from "far behind" the front line, sometimes from more than 125 miles away.

Many of its sensors can be swapped out in a minute, enabling forces to react quickly.

Ukraine's Ministry of Defence has hailed the drone as being capable of tasks normally reserved for much larger models. Its size — just 25kg, or 55 pounds — gives an added advantage: it's "relatively stealthy," Hedges said.

Small, advanced drones are crucial to spotting enemy movements and high-value targets like vehicles and air defenses.

In response, Russia has deployed an ever-evolving array of electronic warfare tactics that aim to scramble signals, spoof GPS positions, or overwhelm radio frequencies.

Hedges said that Skyeton's engineers are continually adapting to these tactics. "The proof is in the data," he added, saying that Ukrainian forces are getting more than 80 missions out of each drone before they're lost.

In contrast to the cumbersome procurement processes of major companies, the Ukrainian drone industry is peppered with small, fast-moving producers who iterate quickly and often interact directly with forces on the ground.

Milrem Robotics, an Estonian company, is creating autonomous ground robots that are being regularly battle-tested in Ukraine.

Its CEO, Kuldar Väärsi, told BI that the conditions in Ukraine are "totally different" to those found in peacetime exercises.

Milrem's THeMIS robot had been designed to be simple to operate, but after a stint in Ukraine, the company's engineers realized they needed it to be even simpler, Väärsi said.

Kit might be designed for use by soldiers trained on how to use it, he added, but in actual war, "anybody who needs that equipment will use it."

• OpenAI values curiosity and initiative more than formal AI credentials, two of its leaders said.
• Nick Turley and Mark Chen said agency and adaptability are key traits OpenAI looks for in new hires.
• Even ChatGPT started as a hackathon project driven by employees across teams, Turley said.

When OpenAI leaders Nick Turley and Mark Chen talk about hiring, they don't rattle off Ivy League credentials or AI competition wins.

Instead, they value something far more human: curiosity and initiative.

In a Tuesday episode of OpenAI's podcast, Turley, the head of ChatGPT, said the single most important trait he looks for isn't technical prowess, but curiosity.

"It's the number one thing that I've looked for," Turley said. "And it's actually my advice to students when they ask me, 'What do I do in this world where everything's changing?'"

"There's so much we don't know," he said. "There's a certain amount of humility you have to have about building on this technology."

He added that working with AI is less about knowing all the answers and more about asking the right questions.

"When it comes to working with AI," he said, "It's asking the right questions that is the bottleneck, not necessarily getting the answer."

Mark Chen, OpenAI's chief research officer, echoed that sentiment.

He said he didn't have much formal AI training when he joined the company in 2018.

"I also came into the company as a resident without much formal AI training," he said. "Even on research, I think increasingly less, we index on you have to have a Ph.D. in AI."

Instead, Chen said OpenAI looks for candidates with "agency"—the ability to identify and solve problems independently.

"It's really about being driven to find, 'Hey, here's the problem. No one else is fixing it. I'm just going to go dive in and fix it,'" he said.

That kind of self-direction is echoed by other OpenAI veterans.

Peter Deng, who served as OpenAI's VP of consumer product and previously led product teams at Meta, put it bluntly on an episode of Lenny's Podcast last month: "In six months, if I'm telling you what to do, I've hired the wrong person."

That expectation aligns closely with OpenAI's own culture of hands-on ownership.

Turley recalled that ChatGPT itself was born out of a hackathon-style sprint, with people from across teams — including infrastructure and supercomputing — coming together to ship a product quickly.

"Fundamentally," Turley said, "we just have a lot of people with agency who can ship."

He added that this is what makes OpenAI unique and is a key focus of the company's hiring process.

• I had rectal bleeding, the most common symptom of colon cancer in people under 45.
• I also had a family history of colon cancer, which pushed me to get a colonoscopy at 33.
• My out-of-pocket colonoscopy cost is over $1,000 so far, but I'm still glad I did it.

I paused, then clicked "cancel appointment."

The blood in my stool, the most common sign of colon cancer in young people, was going away. I chalked up my concerns to my job: I was interviewing colon cancer patients. Naturally, the symptoms were on my mind a lot.

But a year later, the bleeding kept coming back, and more prominently than before. Sometimes, I also had other colon cancer symptoms, like inconsistent bowel movements. From writing more about colon cancer, I heard more stories of healthy young patients having barely any warning signs, only to be diagnosed at stage 4. And then, my grandfather was diagnosed with stage 1 colon cancer in late 2024.

I still had reservations about getting a colonoscopy. It seemed expensive and intense for just one symptom. At the same time, that symptom seemed to be getting worse after a year, and I now had a family history of colon cancer.

In the end, I got a colonoscopy and am so glad I did — even if I'm still navigating the financial side of it.

Colonoscopy or stool test?

I booked a GI appointment after reading about stool tests, which can detect cancer via stool samples. It seemed minimally invasive while still taking some sort of action.

At my appointment, I'd hoped my age, lifestyle, and lack of more severe symptoms like abdominal pain would sway her to recommend the stool test over the colonoscopy.

However, stool tests aren't considered the gold standard of colon cancer screenings because they can only detect cancer. It was possible that I had precancerous polyps, for example, which wouldn't show up in a stool test but could be safely removed and biopsied in a colonoscopy. Plus, colonoscopies can identify other colon-cancer-like issues, such as hemorrhoids or IBD.

My GI performed a quick rectal exam and didn't find anything. She said that given my age, the bleeding was likely caused by internal hemorrhoids or polyps, not cancer. She recommended I get a colonoscopy and some blood work to test my iron levels, which could also point to colon cancer. I booked a colonoscopy for three weeks later.

I was worried about the cost and intensity of the procedure

When my blood work came back normal, I wondered if I was overreacting. Did I really need a colonoscopy?

For one, it was expensive. The procedure would cost $2,000 total without insurance. My GI explained that because my test was diagnostic and being done to examine colon cancer symptoms (as opposed to a standard colon cancer screening), it applied to my deductible. She also said that the cost can vary based on my insurance plan, how far into the deductible I am, and where the colonoscopy is being done. Because I did mine at a free-standing endoscopy center instead of a hospital, it cut down on costs.

The estimate I got from my insurance company was around $813. That didn't include other potential fees like biopsies. This is still lower than the national average cost for a colonoscopy, which starts at $1,250, and some of my coworkers under 45 were quoted closer to $2,000.

The idea of the procedure itself felt intense, too. I'd need to fast and take about $40 of laxatives and Gatorade the night before, undergo anesthesia, and have my husband pick me up. There were also very rare risks, like tears to my colon.

A few times a week, I'd approach my husband forlornly, asking him if he thought I was overreacting and should skip the procedure. Sadly, I learned the hard truth: no one could make this decision but me.

Postponing would be complicated, given our future plans to have kids: I can't get a colonoscopy once I'm pregnant because of risks to the fetus.

I realized that I was fortunate: I had time to pre-plan and budget my colonoscopy, I could easily take a sick day from work, and my husband could take a few hours off from his job to pick me up. If I was going to do it, now was absolutely the best time.

I'm glad I did it, but insurance is a pain

Let's start with the bad news: months after the procedure, I'm still dealing with insurance costs.

I made sure that my FSA funds, the pre-tax money I elected to set aside for medical costs, would cover at least most of the procedure and any extra fees. But because my receipt was missing information, the reimbursement for $813 was denied.

When I asked for a complete receipt, I was told I'd need to wait 30-60 days for my insurance to process my itemized statement. While I was waiting, I was mailed two more bills; $124.08 for a physician's processing fee and $125.40 for the anesthesia.

I'm holding on to them until I get reimbursed for the $813. Otherwise, I'd be paying over $1,000 out of pocket, with no clarity on when I'll actually get the money back, if at all.

I finally had answers for my symptoms

The good news: the colonoscopy itself went smoothly. Sure, induced bowel cleansing wasn't my idea of a riveting Wednesday night. But from speaking to multiple people who've had colonoscopies, it sounds like it wasn't as unpleasant as chugging Golytely, a common colonoscopy prep medication.

The actual procedure took about 20 minutes, all of which I was out for.

Shortly after, my GI popped in to explain my results. It was a huge relief to have answers. Like she suspected, internal hemorrhoids, swollen veins in the anus and lower rectum, were causing the bleeding. Hemorrhoids are fairly common in young people, and activities like lifting heavy weights could cause them. Looking back, the bleeding began around when I started strength training, and my GI confirmed that it could exacerbate the hemorrhoids. I can manage them by drinking more water, eating more fiber, and using hydrocortisone cream.

She also found and removed two polyps, one of which could be precancerous because of its size. A few weeks later, a biopsy confirmed that the polyp was benign, and I don't have to get another colonoscopy until I'm 45 — the recommended starting age for colon cancer screenings.

As the rate of colorectal cancer rises among young people, there is a push for people to get their colon cancer symptoms checked out. But I can understand why anyone under the recommended screening age would skip a colonoscopy. Beyond the financial obstacle, it's not a quick procedure and requires a support system. It's easy to feel like the potential downside — spending time and money for a benign result — isn't worth the peace of mind.

Still, so many early signs of colon cancer are mild. Stories from colon cancer patients — the ones who only got diagnosed in late stages and had to navigate much more invasive treatments with lower odds of success — ultimately taught me that it's never worth taking a chance. It's a steep price to pay, but I'm glad I did.

• Business Insider reporters asked ChatGPT to act as their virtual personal stylist.
• The bot made some helpful outfit suggestions but struggled as a personal shopper.
• Human stylists were split about whether it was useful, with one calling it a "StitchFix" box.

Artificial intelligence may be coming for some jobs, but personal stylists can rest easy — for now.

Users of OpenAI's ChatGPT and others from competitors like Anthropic and Google are perpetually trying to find unique use cases to leverage its expansive knowledge in every aspect of their lives, from professional development to improving their dating game.

However, for two reporters, there is still one subject they'd rather leave to humans: Fashion advice.

Two Business Insider reporters uploaded their photos to ChatGPT and asked the bot to act as their virtual stylist, suggesting color palettes and a series of outfits to appear polished even in casual settings.

One reporter asked ChatGPT to suggest outfits to take her from walking the dogs and running errands to going out and reporting in the field. The other requested outfit suggestions for a journalist living in Los Angeles that could take her from work events to dinner at a trendy restaurant.

Three human stylists then reviewed the results.

Man versus machine, fashion edition

Human stylists were split about whether the bot was useful, with one calling it akin to a "StitchFix" box. That's not to say there was anything technically wrong with the outfits ChatGPT recommended; they were just, well, a bit boring for the reporters' tastes.

"Let me start by saying I was pretty impressed by the overall results," Charline Zeroual, a sustainable wardrobe stylist, told Business Insider, adding that "the color palette seems to be right."

Zeroual said the suggestions were missing "soul." No patterns or prints, no standout accessories, and the outfit suggestions didn't take the weather or typical professional norms into account — a lawyer is expected to dress differently than a writer, for example. ChatGPT didn't seem to make the distinction.

"Your style is 80% basics and good foundation, but 20% you need some essence," Zeroual said. "You need the signature. You need something specific to you that is going to make your style personal."

Amanda Massi, a luxury personal stylist based in Los Angeles and Las Vegas, and St. Louis-based stylist Dacy Gillespie, both agreed.

"It's too generic," Massi told Business Insider. "Even when you upload a photo, like you did yourself, you're going to get pretty Pinterest-y, cookie-cutter results that aren't really speaking to your true lifestyle or your authentic message."

"I'm not worried for my job," Gillespie said.

ChatGPT was able to create custom style lookbooks and recommend color palettes based on photos we uploaded of ourselves, both of which could be useful if someone has no idea where to start when it comes to building a wardrobe or developing personal style.

However, despite our attempts to describe our style in detail, the lookbook was nowhere close to matching it. When given feedback and asked to try again, ChatGPT's lookbook did improve, but it was still way too basic to inspire any new looks.

ChatGPT as a personal shopper

We also tried using ChatGPT as a personal shopper by telling it a specific item we were looking for, and it fared decently, but not great. With one prompt, we described a specific style of brown moto boots we were looking for, and we were pleasantly surprised to see that its very first recommendation was pretty decent.

But it was also the exact same top result that we got on Google with a shorter search term than the prompt we had to give ChatGPT — and the other Google results were actually more in line with our description than the others the AI recommended.

Other recommendations made by ChatGPT sent us to broken links, or pages that contained entirely different articles of clothing than the bot was trying to offer up. In one instance, a link provided by ChatGPT that was supposed to take you to a site to purchase a pair of olive green utility trousers instead presented the page of a pink bikini.

Massi took a look at the recommendations ChatGPT gave and said she also wasn't impressed with where it was sourcing its picks, noting that it didn't source any higher-quality or independent labels that a human stylist would find for you.

While, in theory, you could communicate your preferences and refine its results repeatedly with ChatGPT, she said, getting it to really know your style could be a challenge.

"Everyone's creative language is so different, and it's something that sometimes can't be tangible. You can't really grasp it," she said. "To communicate your creative language to a computer program, I think it's very difficult to do accurately."

Massi said in her work, the first thing she does is physically visit a client's closet, so she can get a full and in-depth sense of what they already like to wear and already own. It also allows her to pick up on nonverbal cues that signal who the client is, what they're comfortable, and what they won't be comfortable in.

Though the stylists who spoke to Business Insider do not think AI is there quite yet, they agreed it's a promising start and could be helpful for someone just beginning to think seriously about their personal style.

Massi said she is excited about the future possibilities. One interesting use case could be maintaining a digital closet where all the items of your wardrobe are stored. Then, generative AI can be used to put together new outfits with items you already have.

But she said there's still a ways to go before we get a "Clueless"-level smart closet.

"I found it's helpful for putting something in and then just seeing it spit something back at you to get your own brain started," Gillespie said. "It's not necessarily that you're going to do what ChatGPT does, but it can act as a starting point."

• The US Navy stood up a new task force last year to explore innovation for future wars.
• The task force is closely watching how Ukraine has leveraged asymmetric tactics against Russia.
• It is training warships to survive some of the threats that hit Russia's fleet hard.

Amid rapid changes in naval warfare, a ship today could find itself suddenly facing a swarm of small, fast, uncrewed vessels ready to strike hard right at the waterline — a potentially critical hit. With this growing threat in mind, the US Navy is training warships to defend against attacks by hostile drone boats.

Navy leadership is closely watching how drones are shaping the conflict in Ukraine and studying how it can integrate uncrewed systems into the traditional fleet for future operations.

Drone boats, specifically, are dangerous and innovative weapons that Ukraine used to inflict pain on Russia's fleet in the Black Sea. Top commanders see the offensive potential, as well as the need to be ready to defend against them.

"These asymmetric capabilities can be used against us, too," Rear Adm. Michael Mattis, commander of the Navy's Task Force 66, told Business Insider in a recent interview. Asymmetric warfare refers to employing cheap weapons en masse against expensive enemy targets.

Last month, the Navy participated in multiple training exercises aimed at preparing warship crews for the kind of threats they could face in future conflicts, simulating drone boat attacks on US warships. It exposed crews to an emerging threat with devastating potential.

Mattis serves as the director of strategic effects for US Naval Forces Europe-Africa, which launched Task Force 66 last year to merge robotic and autonomous systems into fleet operations. The initiative underscores the Navy's efforts to operate drones alongside conventional crewed naval combat platforms as it explores innovative and asymmetric warfighting tactics.

In the Black Sea, Ukraine has demonstrated to the US and its NATO allies the dangers of ignoring these capabilities.

At the start of Russia's full-scale invasion in February 2022, the Ukrainians didn't have much of a navy to project maritime power, so Kyiv leaned into asymmetric warfare and relied on a campaign of missile strikes and attacks with domestically produced naval drones to wreak havoc on Moscow's Black Sea Fleet.

Ukraine's operations damaged or destroyed dozens of Russian warships and forced Moscow to relocate the bulk of its fleet from its long-held headquarters in the occupied Crimean peninsula to the port of Novorossiysk in the eastern part of the Black Sea.

Mattis said that the Ukrainian campaign has seen Kyiv defeat around 40% of the Russian naval force in the Black Sea. But it has also highlighted what he described as an action, reaction, and counteraction cycle of innovation on the battlefield, where one side fields a capability, the other side fields a counter-capability, and then the first side fields a counter to that counter.

Russia, for example, found it difficult to stop Ukraine's naval drone attacks with warship defenses alone, so it responded by increasing its combat patrol aircraft presence to better monitor the Black Sea. Ukraine reacted to this development by outfitting its naval drones with surface-to-air missiles, which have already shot down Russian fighter jets and helicopters.

Despite being able to generate significant combat power in the air, Russia's naval forces have been relatively constrained to Novorossiysk. Its limited operations suggest that Moscow is either unwilling or unable to project power in the Black Sea and can't achieve its objectives to control the waterway, Mattis said.

"Ukraine has been incredibly successful in achieving strategic effects in the Black Sea and essentially leveraging their asymmetry against the Russians," he said.

'No ideal tactic'

The Navy watched this asymmetric warfare cycle unfold in the Black Sea and realized the pressing need to reduce it down to its most basic form in a "red-versus-blue" training scenario.

"We want to put our ships into a defensive area where they have to think and react to this problem set," Mattis said, sharing that most have done training in this, but not a lot.

"We know that this is an evolving capability," he said. "We know that the Russians were slow to adapt defensive measures against it, and as a result, they lost more ships than perhaps they should have, had they been able to adapt faster."

During a recent exercise called Baltic Operations 2025, Task Force 66 used uncrewed surface vessels to simulate attacks on two Navy ships: the command and control vessel USS Mount Whitney and the guided-missile destroyer USS Paul Ignatius.

The task force deployed a naval drone called the Global Autonomous Reconnaissance Craft and other systems for the exercise. This system, made by the US company BlackSea Technologies, resembles a small speedboat and can sprint up to 40 knots, or 46 mph.

Mattis said that the goal was to put the ships in a situation where they had to react on an uncomfortably short timeline. In some of the training scenarios, operators would have a drone tail one of the larger vessels and then suddenly sprint out from behind it, forcing it to react. In other situations, multiple drone boats attacked from different angles.

One of the challenges with naval drones is that they are small, making them more difficult to detect and differentiate from various commercial boats. When operating in a normal routine, like in port, the watch team might not be able to identify the threat before tragedy struck.

Mattis said the exercise took place at the basic level, with the purpose of creating what he described as a dilemma. He said this specific exercise was designed so sailors could understand the operating characteristics of the fast and agile naval drones, which can appear almost undetected out of nowhere and quickly swarm a vessel.

There were no live-fire engagements during the training exercise, meaning the ships didn't shoot at the drone boats. However, the Navy does train for that. At a different European exercise held in May, sailors on the destroyer USS Thomas Hudner practiced using the warship's guns to defend against a naval drone attack.

Task Force 66 is experimenting with some more advanced tactics and aims to eventually build more complex training scenarios, which Mattis said will likely resemble a "free play" mode, where participants learn how to operate and react on the fly rather than via scripted runs designed for safety and repeatability.

"Going back to the fundamentals, because of this iterative nature and innovative nature of this changing character of war with drones, what we're seeing is that there's no ideal tactic, there's no ideal capability," Mattis said, explaining that "there's only a combination of tactics and capabilities that have to change over time to continue to generate dilemmas and surprise for the adversary to be ultimately defeated."

'Innovate to survive'

The naval drone exercises last month are just one way Task Force 66 is taking key lessons learned from the Ukraine war and applying them in training scenarios. It is also trying to see how it can replicate some of the low-cost, high-return effects that it has observed in the Black Sea and apply them in other theaters, like the contested Indo-Pacific region.

Navy leadership is increasingly preparing for the rise of artificial intelligence, drones, autonomous systems, and other emerging technologies in future conflicts, but Mattis acknowledged that one of the challenges of addressing the changing nature of warfare — fast enough to keep up with the speed of adaptation — is figuring out how to do it when you're not facing an existential threat.

He explained that "when someone pushes a gun in your face, as Russia did with Ukraine, and you are forced to innovate to survive — when it is absolutely 'figure it out or die' — the ability to get after problem-solving and the ability to remove barriers and eliminate excuses is incredible."

"We've seen our Ukrainian partners do that in ways that are incredibly inspiring," he said. The US Navy isn't in that kind of fight, but it realizes it needs to be ready for one.

• Eric Roberge and his wife, both financial planners, reversed their decision to be child-free.
• Before doing so, they adapted their financial plan to emphasize flexibility and savings.
• The couple also kept lifestyle inflation to a minimum and ignored traditional FIRE-style goals.

For many years, my wife and I opted to be child-free. I could see myself having kids, but also felt at peace with the idea of not having children at all. My wife was more firmly in the "no thanks" camp when she was in her 20s.

Then, we both changed our minds.

It wasn't any one particular event or conversation, but more of the cumulative effect that I think many people experienced during the COVID-19 pandemic: 2020 put things in a different perspective.

It created a pause in our normal day-to-day lives that gave us a chance to reflect and think about what truly mattered to us: close relationships, being part of a community, and doing meaningful work, whether that work was in our business or beyond it, such as caring for others.

That led us to agree that we did want to have children after all. Being financial advisors, we knew that such a left turn in life would require us to review and reconsider the financial planning we had done to date.

We felt good about reversing our stance on our family structure precisely because of the financial planning philosophy we use, for ourselves and in my work for clients as a personal financial advisor: You don't know what will change in life, but you can know with near certainty that something will change. You have to make financial decisions and plans that account for that reality.

We made our financial plan highly adaptable so that it was easy to shift once we realized we wanted to grow our family. These 5 steps were critical to our success.

1. We made a habit of saving more than we "had to" or "should"

We spent a decade saving between 30 to 40 percent of our income because we prioritized future flexibility. We also knew how powerful "frontloading" our savings could be.

To reap the biggest benefits from the power of compounding returns on investments, you need to stay invested for a very long time period. And the earlier you start, the more you can benefit from the compounding effect.

We save less now, partly because we have all kinds of expenses we did not have before adding a child to the family — school tuition, a third airplane seat on trips, endless stuffed animal acquisition, and so on.

But "saving less" does not mean abandoning the savings habit altogether. We now save about 25% of our income annually. While it's less than before, it's still higher than average, though it feels like an easy target to meet after sustaining higher savings rates for so long. It's also sufficient to meet our biggest current financial goal of retiring in our 50s.

2. We avoided major fixed costs or hard-to-reverse decisions

While we were child-free we opted out of the biggest fixed cost most people put into their budgets: buying a house.

Without definitive clarity on what the future might look like, we prioritized the flexibility and ease of renting even when everyone around us was buying homes. We reasoned that we should take advantage of the fact we had no external force tying us to a specific location.

Homebuying is a specific example, but we tried to use this frame of thinking more generally to help us avoid very large fixed costs or decisions that were hard to undo. If a choice in the moment would narrow our options for tomorrow, we tended to view it as a sub-optimal choice and sought other alternatives.

3. We kept lifestyle inflation to a minimum along the way

Even as our income grew, we rarely increased our spending. This allowed us to create a larger and larger gap between what we earned and what we spent — giving us a surplus we could save and invest.

Before adding a new recurring expense, we asked ourselves if it aligned with our values or provided benefits like giving us the ability to buy back our time. If not, we didn't allow that line item to add to our budget.

When we did eventually buy a house, we looked at homes that were significantly less expensive than what a lender would call affordable to ensure we didn't max out our budget.

4. We said no to traditional FIRE-style retirement goals

Instead of trying to get out of the workforce on the slimmest investment portfolio possible, as some FIRE strategies that were extremely popular in the 2010s aimed to do, we worked to:

• create work we loved and didn't want to run away from
• prioritize sustainable income growth over efforts to live as frugally as possible

Doing so allowed us to harness our increasing cash flow power for present-day purchases and more contributions to growth assets in our investment portfolio.

5. We pivoted when the situation called for it

What works today might not work in the future if things change — and that's okay. Being willing to change is a huge asset.

When we had our daughter in 2021, we chose to save a little less so that we could spend a little more on her as well as things as a family. We did this knowing that a higher level of spending introduced a bit more long-term risk into our plan, due to taking our foot off the gas in terms of contributions to long-term investments.

At the end of the day, the only constant is change — whether from external forces you can't control or from the choices you willingly make with full agency.

The more willing you are to adapt to the situation at hand, the more likely you'll be to continue on a track for success.

By being proactive, accounting for unpredictability, and having contingency plans in place, you'll better position yourself (and your money) for whatever life throws at you — without having to give up long-term goals you're working hard to achieve.

• Christy Rutherford left a successful Coast Guard career due to toxic leadership and burnout.
• She faced deeper burnout, financial loss, and depression after resigning from her position.
• Rutherford rebuilt her life and now helps other leaders recover from burnout and achieve success.

I started my career in the US Coast Guard as a college sophomore in 1996. After graduating, I was stationed on a ship in Charleston, South Carolina, chasing drug runners in the Caribbean.

I transitioned into crisis management and moved four times over the next 12 years. I responded to Hurricane Katrina in 2005 and worked on Capitol Hill as a congressional fellow for the late Congressman Elijah Cummings in 2007.

I loved my career and learned from some exceptional leaders. I also had the misfortune of surviving a few toxic ones. I was one of 50 Black women officers out of nearly 50,000, and I felt my competence was questioned regularly. I worked 80 hours weekly to prove myself.

I worked from sunup to sundown

I studied for professional certifications at night and obtained several advanced degrees. Work-life balance seemed impossible, and no matter how many awards I received, I was never satisfied.

In 2010, I was promoted to the executive level and relocated to Port Arthur, Texas. The following year, a former toxic boss became my supervisor again, and everything started to unravel. Constantly handling emergencies while ignoring my well-being caught up with me, and my mental and physical health declined rapidly.

During one demeaning meeting with my boss in 2012, I started yelling at him. Feeling that senior leadership had failed to protect me, I resigned from my highly successful, six-figure career with only three and a half years left until retirement, forfeiting a full pension.

I knew that if I didn't make a change, I wouldn't survive another year.

I decided to move

I moved to DC and worked with a network marketing company selling coffee. My family and friends thought I was crazy, and they weren't wrong.

I was burned out and couldn't make rational decisions. Within 18 months, I had spent my six-figure savings.

I moved in with my brother in South Carolina in 2013, agreeing it would only be for a few months. I worked 16-hour days to recover my money, and a few months later, I mentally collapsed. It was catastrophic.

I was deeply depressed

It felt like I had fallen into a hole deeper than the Grand Canyon and then into the ocean's abyss. People often talk about hitting rock bottom, but I've learned that there are even deeper places of despair.

A government official completed my veteran's disability paperwork and noted I was eligible to receive several thousand dollars a month because my mental and physical condition rendered me incapable of working to earn an income.

I chose not to submit the paperwork because I knew I could fully recover if I worked just as hard on myself as I had in my career.

I pursued wholeness, and it took two years to heal physically, four years to recover mentally, and seven years to recover financially.

I did five things to recover mentally

I discovered the true meaning of self-care and made it a habit. I started meditating, working out, and walking at least three times a week. I also started sleeping eight hours a night.

I stopped watching the news. Since the news was primarily negative, it didn't make me feel good about myself or my recovery.

I took off my superhero cape and changed my phone number. I had to stop trying to save everyone else and myself at the same time.

I deleted social media for 18 months. I couldn't process all the information I consumed. I felt like I was lying about my life while watching everyone else lie about theirs.

I forgave my family. Being one of the first people in my family to graduate from college, I was terrified of failure. When my worst nightmare came true, and I failed and lost everything, I realized they didn't need to change; I did.

I also did five things to recover financially

In 2016, I was accepted into Harvard Business School with a solid past and a grand vision of the future, but a messy present moment of nothingness. The Program for Leadership Development helped me translate military language into corporate terminology, enabling me to market my leadership development services effectively. I saw my habits of exhaustive working and self-neglect reflected in my peers.

I published five books in eight months and started coaching my HBS colleagues on their careers and burnout. It was a natural transition.

In January 2017, I graduated from HBS and finally moved out of my brother's house. I invested in a business coach. However, 10 months later, I couldn't afford my rent and the coach, so I gave up my place and spent a year traveling, staying with friends and family while building my business.

In 2019, I started teaching leaders how to recover from burnout by appealing to their desire for career advancement. I had my first 6-figure year in 2019.

Today, with a team of eight, I've helped hundreds of leaders recover from burnout, alleviate stress-related medical conditions, retain their jobs, and reclaim their value in the market.

Looking back, there are three things I wish I had done differently

First, I would've prioritized my self-care sooner.

Second, I would've faced the truth that my relentless drive for achievement was rooted in the fear of failure.

Lastly, I would've slowed down to actually enjoy the life I was working so hard to build.

Do you have a story to share about recovering from burnout? Contact this editor at [email protected].

• The hiring frenzy of the past few weeks for elite AI talent has been on an entirely different level.
• Tech workers not getting offers are jealous and wondering, "What am I doing wrong?" according to one VC.
• The bidding war is trickling down to classrooms, where companies are encouraging interns to drop out of school.

In Silicon Valley, it is the summer of compensation FOMO.

Startup employees and venture investors have been swapping stories about eye-popping salary and equity packages as Meta CEO Mark Zuckerberg has rushed to pay top dollar to poach elite AI and machine-learning talent. While some people are getting offers in the tens of millions of dollars, others who aren't getting such rich packages thrown their way are feeling left out.

"There's a ton of ripple effects I'm hearing in the Valley," said Deedy Das, an AI investor at Anthropic backer Menlo Ventures. "There is a sense of jealousy, envy, and helplessness, and everybody being like, 'I thought I was doing pretty well. What am I doing wrong? I would love to get those offers."'

Das heard from three friends who are machine-learning engineers or researchers at OpenAI or Anthropic who are being offered between $8 and $20 million in total compensation a year to join Meta, which declined to comment for this story.

"I would describe them as in a state of shock," Das said of one of his friends, whom he declined to name, who decided to turn Meta down because they did not think it was a good fit. "You plan out your career with certain assumptions, and then when something like this happens, it's like you are getting paid more in a year than you had predicted you would ever make in your career. It's honestly hard to digest."

Tech companies have long shelled out top dollar for the most elite talent, but the eight people BI spoke to for this story agreed that the hiring frenzy of the past few weeks has been on an entirely different level.

It started when Meta recruited Scale CEO Alexandr Wang last month as part of a $14.3 billion deal to take a 49% stake in his company. Then Sam Altman, CEO of OpenAI, said Meta had tried to poach his best employees with $100 million signing bonuses. Meta executives recently pushed back, saying that the signing bonuses were not that generous.

This week, Zuckerberg announced Wang would co-lead a new unit, Meta Superintelligence Labs, with six star researchers poached from OpenAI.

Some on X have compared the bidding war for top AI talent to sports franchises competing for star athletes like Cristiano Ronaldo and suggested researchers hire agents to represent them.

"In my 20 years in tech, I have never seen as clearly defined a market for extraordinary talent in a single category as for people who are capable of doing work on the frontier in AI right now," said Roy Bahat, the longtime head of VC firm Bloomberg Beta.

A shortage of talent and an excess of money

Driving the frenzy is the confluence of two factors, according to Bahat and others. On the one hand, there are a limited number of researchers and engineers capable of building foundational models — something in the neighborhood of 2,000 people. At the same time, companies led by Meta, which is approaching a market capitalization of $2 trillion, have the resources to spend almost anything to avoid falling behind.

"These companies are just all so much bigger than they used to be," Bahat said.

The bidding war is trickling down to classrooms, where companies are going after top machine-learning Ph.D. interns as early as possible.

"They're pressuring them to drop out of school," according to Bill Aulet, managing director of the Martin Trust Center for Entrepreneurship at MIT. "It's dizzying."

Explicit in the pitch for students is that advances in AI are happening so fast that a once-in-a-lifetime moment could be over by graduation, according to Bahat.

"A lot of people are figuring out they spend these few precious years when this technology is at an inflection point," said Bahat. "It's a really high-stakes choice."

The calculus has also changed for would-be founders thinking about starting foundational model startups who are daunted by how much they have to raise, according to Navin Chaddha, managing partner of Mayfield Fund.

"For PhDs in the past, you could start a company for $5 million, but now you may need to raise $30 to $50 million to pay starting salaries," he said. He added that some would-be? founders stay at big tech companies because the salaries have gotten so high. "A lot of people don't want to take the risk because they have guaranteed money in the pocket."

Mira Murati, the former CTO of OpenAI, has paid some talent around half a million dollars in salary for her new startup, Thinking Machines Lab, before even announcing a first funding round or a product, BI reported this week. The figure does not include equity or signing bonuses, which is where startup employees hope to make most of their money.

Eye-popping new salaries side, some in the industry hope that startups can maintain their ethos that money isn't the only draw.

In contrast to Wall Street, tech has long espoused a view of doing something good for the world.

"At the very elite levels for AI research, there are a lot of people who are extremely values-driven, so not being mission-driven is a dead end," Das said. "Usually when you're not mission-driven, attrition is bad and productivity is poor."

Do you have a tip to share about the AI recruiting wars? Contact reporter Ben Bergman securely on Signal at BenBergman.11

• Luckin Coffee just opened its first US store and I sampled drinks, including a pineapple cold brew.
• Customers were stunned by the hugely discounted prices and generally pleased with the experience.
• As a coffee purist, I wasn't thrilled, but think Luckin Coffee could hurt Starbucks with its prices.

Nothing says Tuesday morning like a mysteriously chunky, not entirely disappointing $2 pineapple cold brew.

At least not if you're close to a Luckin Coffee, the Chinese chain that has overtaken Starbucks in China and opened its first two US locations this week in Manhattan. The brand aims to lure customers in with low prices and consistent promos.

I visited the Greenwich Village location on Tuesday morning. All ordering happens on the app, which I quickly downloaded before hopping on the subway. I was a bit overwhelmed at first, my phone screen suddenly filled with brightly colored "summer essentials" and a surprising recommended drink: pineapple cold brew.

The prices were maybe more surprising than the flavors — because of an opening promo, every drink cost just $1.99. I went with the pineapple cold brew and a "solar breeze," which is a mix of blood orange and grapefruit flavors.

My drinks were waiting for me when I arrived at the small store, and an employee helped me scan the QR code attached to my order to pick them up. I wasn't alone in my confusion; employees politely helped most customers figure out the QR code situation.

Slight confusion about the pick-up aside, the ordering process was pretty fast and seamless, but it lacked a human connection. In fact, the whole place seemed impersonal, with nondescript wall photographs and everyone staring at their phones by design.

One thing to know before I give my reviews: I'm something of a coffee purist. I generally drink black drip or an iced coffee with a splash of milk. Maybe I'll get a dirty chai or a cappuccino if I'm feeling crazy. Needless to say, I'm not the ideal customer for fruit-infused cold brew or "iced coconut velvet latte," whatever that entails.

My first sip of the pineapple cold brew just tasted like chunky pineapple juice — not bad, but not coffee. After some aggressive cup shaking, I took another sip. This time, it also tasted like chunky pineapple juice, just more watered down. Weirdly, I wasn't mad about it.

The solar breeze was pleasantly sour and also unexpectedly filled with orange chunks. I probably would've preferred it in the afternoon rather than at 10 am, but I can see why juice aficionados would be pleased.

Bruce Leon, 53, told me he actually liked the chunkiness of the pineapple cold brew, because it suggested the drink wasn't made from syrup. He said he'd never heard of Luckin before, but plans to come back with a friend. Chelsea, 33, also didn't know about the brand but walked in because it's across from her subway stop. Her plain cold brew was, she said, "really good."

Courtney Kraft, 30, however, knew all about Luckin's presence in China and was visiting for a second time. She was doing work at one of the few tables and sipping a coconut water matcha, which she said was "delicious."

Jeremy, 28, learned about Luckin from the news and ordered an iced coconut latte. I witnessed Jeremy's first Luckin sip, which was met with a content head nod. "It's good!" he said. He said he thought the quality matched Starbucks, but he preferred Starbucks' app.

Of everyone I spoke with, Evan, 30, was by far the biggest Luckin expert — he'd been to locations in Shanghai, where he's from. His go-to is the iced coconut latte, and he said he remembers constant promos at the locations in Shanghai.

At this point, I had to try the iced coconut latte, which was unavailable when I first ordered because the location was entirely out of milk. I added a "chocolate frappe" and banana yogurt bread, one of the few food offerings, to my order, too.

The latte didn't taste much like coconut, but also didn't taste too strongly of coffee. I hadn't had a frappe since middle school, when I would order a double-chocolately chip frappuccino from Starbucks and convince myself I was caffeinated. It tasted like a moderately icy milkshake, though, so I wasn't complaining.

By now, I was weighed down with four cups, and I assume everyone in Luckin thought I was completely insane. An employee kindly handed me two bags for my many purchases, the retail version of the Oscars walk-off music.

Everyone I talked to raved about the prices, especially in New York City, where Courtney said she can pay up to $15 for a specialty drink. At Luckin's NYC store, a regular-price iced latte costs $5.75, compared to $5.95 at Starbucks, but the company is known for frequent discounts. Jeremy said that with the promo, the prices are unbeatable. Even though Starbucks is his preferred coffee, he said cost is more important than other factors.

Analysts previously told BI that Luckin's model of offering heavily discounted prices may not be sustainable in the US, though Starbucks' increasingly high costs might offer an opening. Representatives declined to comment for this article.

While standing outside, I saw a young woman pass the sign advertising coffee for $1.99, double back, and download the app.

I can't say I'll necessarily be back at Luckin, but again, I'm a coffee purist, and this brand doesn't seem to cater to those of us who think less is more. Generally, the New Yorkers I talked to seemed pleased and eager to return, especially if the discounts keep rolling in.

I wouldn't be shocked if Starbucks, already struggling with falling sales, soon starts offering summer promos on some sort of fruity, unlikely coffee concoction.

• Skims' cofounder said he turned to Starbucks for business inspiration.
• He said Starbucks drinks were premium but affordable, and the quality difference was worth the price.
• Skims, which sells bras priced at $50 and above, commands a premium over its competitors.

Skims' cofounder said he wanted the firm to become the Starbucks of underwear.

Jens Grede, who cofounded the loungewear company with his wife Emma Grede and media personality Kim Kardashian, said he looks to the coffee chain a lot for inspiration.

In a podcast episode with Colossus, released Tuesday, Grede said the "first sip feeling" with a Starbucks drink was a "distinct sensory experience."

"Every office building in America has free coffee. My office has free coffee. Pretty good ones, too," he said. "But I still think that Starbucks is worth my $5.50 or $6."

"It's at a premium, but it's still available to me. It's still affordable. And I believe that the quality difference is worth the difference in price," he added.

He said he tried to emulate this with Skims, which sells a range of basic, minimalist underwear, shapewear, and loungewear.

"I saw the opportunity to create that in this category. In the beginning, primarily for women, and now, of course, for everybody," Grede said in the podcast.

Most of Skims' bras cost more than $50, and its underwear costs around $18. Its most popular products, like its long ribbed slip dress and cotton tank top, retail for $80 and $38, respectively.

In comparison, Victoria's Secret's bras start at around $40, while Calvin Klein's start at around $30.

"It might be slightly more expensive, but still affordable," Grede added.

The New York Times reported in 2023 that Skims, which started in 2018, was worth $4 billion.

Grede's comments come as Starbucks is trying to turn its business around while remaining a premium coffee option.

Starbucks has faced various challenges, including long wait times, flaws in the customer experience, and issues with its mobile ordering system.

Starbucks' CEO, Brian Niccol, has since implemented his "Back to Starbucks" plan to improve the café experience.

Representatives for Skims did not respond to requests for comment from Business Insider.