• Andrew Lambrecht rented a 2023 Polestar 2 to compare it to his 2021 Tesla Model 3.
• He discovered the Polestar 2 has a premium feel but lacks efficiency and tech compared to Tesla.
• If he were in the market for a new EV, he would choose the Tesla Model 3 Long Range RWD.

Last summer, I bought my second used Tesla Model 3, a 2021 Long Range AWD in the low $20,000 range, with incentives. I considered several other options but decided to buy another Model 3 for its engaging driving dynamics, wickedly fast acceleration, solid tech, and reliable powertrain.

I enjoy driving my Model 3, but the market has grown to include many more attractive options than just Tesla, like the Polestar 2, a four-door that arrived in the US in late 2020. It boasts a clean yet muscular design and solid, but not groundbreaking, range, charging, and performance.

The Polestar 2 looks like a good car on paper but flies below the radar. To learn more about the sporty sedan, I rented one from Hertz for a week to test it at $48 per day, which included mandatory airport fees and taxes. For the purpose of this story, Business Insider compensated me for the rental price.

Who is Polestar?

Polestar is a Swedish automotive upstart founded by Volvo and China-based Geely Holding Group in 2017. The electric vehicle maker offers three electric cars: the 2 sedan, the 3 SUV, and the 4 crossover.

Having roots with Volvo, Polestars and Volvos share a lot of components. Volvo recently divested from Polestar, though the two automakers still collaborate on manufacturing and engineering ventures.

Polestar 2: First impressions

When I picked up the Polestar 2, I noticed that my rental was the base version with a 2023 Dual Motor but no added packages besides upgraded 20-inch wheels. That said, all models' exteriors and interiors look virtually the same aside from different trim pieces and a glass roof.

As soon as you enter the Polestar, its Scandinavian vibe is evident. Its muscle car-esque proportions and higher-raked windshield make it feel like you're in a cocoon. A high-sitting center console, standard metal roof, and dark headliner material give the Polestar a sporty, mature, and premium vibe.

It feels well-built. The doors with framed windows produce a solid "thunk" when closing, and the blinker stocks, drive selector, and steering wheel all have a high-end feel.

There are some hard-touch plastics here and there (more than in a Tesla), but elements like the brushed metal door handles redirect your focus. The Polestar 2 feels better built than my older Model 3 but is on par with the refreshed 2024 version. I can see buyers preferring either.

On the road with the Polestar 2

Despite being an AWD electric sedan like the Tesla Model 3, the most noticeable difference is the weight. The Polestar 2 weighs 4,650 pounds — the big battery Model 3 weighs 4,019. 600 pounds is a sizable difference, and you can feel it when taking corners.

Still, the Polestar 2 is a rapid vehicle. With 402 horsepower, it can hustle to 60 in about 4.5 seconds. Unlike the Model 3, you can launch it by pressing your left foot on the brake pedal and right foot on the accelerator, then letting the brake go.

On the road, the Polestar 2 also does an excellent job of minimizing vibrations. While the new Model 3 is much better in this regard, there's a notable difference with my outgoing Model 3.

Another benefit is the added ground clearance and lower plastic cladding. While it's no rugged SUV, the Polestar 2 is capable of light off-roading with 6 inches of ground clearance.

Polestar range and charging

During my final day with the Polestar, I drove through the North Carolina mountains and stopped at a 350-kilowatt EA station outside Asheville. I recorded around 30 minutes to go from 17 to 80% charged. In that time, the charger dispensed 53 kilowatt-hours, which cost $30.91. This charging time is fine but not revolutionary.

The Polestar 2 has a peak charge rate of 150 kilowatts but dropped below the 100-kilowatt threshold by around 55%. The Model 3 has a peak of 250 kilowatts, but it sees a similar drop to the 100-kilowatt mark at around 60% charge. The big difference is its efficiency. The Polestar has a battery similar in capacity to my Model 3, but it can't go as far on a charge.

I recorded an estimated 224 miles of range at 70 miles per hour. My 2021 Model 3 can get around 270 miles within that speed range. Since the Polestar 2 isn't as efficient as the Tesla Model 3, it'll need more energy to travel the same distance, increasing the cost.

I never had any anxiety with the Polestar, as its range was still more than ample for my driving, averaging over 100 miles per day. When I get to campus, I plug in and head to class.

Average tech and missing safety features

Despite having a sticker price above $50,000, the Polestar had virtually no safety features. This one didn't have adaptive cruise control, lane centering assist, or even a blind spot monitor. For comparison, every new Tesla, Hyundai, Kia, Volkswagen, and Toyota EV comes with adaptive cruise control as standard.

Another disappointing area of the Polestar 2 is its lackluster technology. While the Polestar features two crisp displays powered by Google software, the computer chip powering them is an Intel A3900 chip, which debuted in 2016. The result is a display that can be laggy and somewhat unresponsive.

Nevertheless, it's still better than other systems I've used before. The Google-based system effortlessly adds charging stops, telling you what percentage you'll arrive with and how long you'll need to charge, but for a fresh-faced automaker, it trails behind Rivian and Tesla.

Verdict

I liked many things about the Polestar but wouldn't buy a new one. If I were looking at the new market, the updated Tesla Model 3 Long Range RWD is the better buy. It offers 363 miles of range, better charging, more standard features, and a lower price tag.

If you're buying used with a budget in the mid to upper-$20,000 range, the Polestar 2 is worth a look. Just due to the sheer number of Teslas on the road, the 2 is refreshing. It drives well, has a decent range, and has an alluring Scandinavian aura.

While the Model 3 started it all, the Polestar is a solid alternative that checks different boxes. There's a lot to like about it, and I will miss my time driving it.

• The Front Man in "Squid Game" is Hwang In-ho, detective Hwang Jun-ho's brother.
• One fan theory suggests that In-ho could be related to another character in the series.
• It's not impossible, but the evidence isn't overwhelming.

In season two of "Squid Game," the game's steward — known as the Front Man, or Hwang In-ho under the mask — enters the game himself. Though he's already related to one other character in the show, a new theory suggests he could be further tied to the games.

In season one, detective Hwang Jun-ho (Wi Ha-jun) infiltrated the games in search of his older brother In-ho (Lee Byung-hun). In-ho wasn't a player in the games with Seong Gi-hun (Lee Jung-jae), however — he was the one running them. But in season two, In-ho infiltrates the games as player 001 using the name Oh Young-il.

In-ho mostly seems to be there to break Gi-hun's spirit, treating him like a comrade until he sabotages Gi-hun's rebellion in the season finale. He's not the first player 001 to betray Gi-hun's trust: In season one, the game's creator Oh Il-nam plays alongside Gi-hun as well before revealing his true identity in the outside world.

One moment in season two has fans thinking that In-ho and Il-nam may be further connected — but it's far from conclusive.

Fans speculate that Il-nam is In-ho's father — because of two lines about milk

In season one, episode three, Gi-hun asks one of the guards distributing snacks to players if he could trade his regular milk for chocolate milk, saying that he's never been able to digest plain milk. The guard refuses, but Il-nam remarks on Gi-hun's preferences.

"I bet your father spanked you a lot when you were young," Il-nam says.

"How did you know?" Gi-hun asks.

"My son was just like you," Il-nam replies.

In season two, episode five, In-ho doesn't drink his plain milk either. After the guards serve the players a similar bread and milk snack, In-ho passes his milk to the pregnant Jun-hee instead of drinking it.

"I don't drink plain milk," he tells her.

The "milk theory" has proliferated on social media platforms like Reddit and X. However, one image in support of the theory being circulated online includes inaccurate dialogue.

The above screenshot, which was also posted to the r/squidgame subreddit, simplifies the dialogue in both scenes. Il-nam never tells Gi-hun, "you are just like my son he couldn't drink milk too," and In-ho never says, "here, I can't drink it anyway."

To be fair, the original dialogue in each respective scene isn't that different — but it is slightly more nuanced.

The 'milk theory' raises some other questions

A twist like this would feel a bit out of character for "Squid Game," particularly given that the show has already pulled a secret-family-member twist with the Front Man already. That doesn't necessarily mean it couldn't happen, but the evidence isn't overwhelming.

First, Il-nam says several times in season one that he has a son, singular. In the season finale, he tells Gi-hun on his deathbed that "long ago, I once lived in a house in an alley just like that one with my wife and son."

However, in season two, we learn that In-ho and Jun-ho are half brothers who share a father because Jun-ho's mother refers to In-ho as her stepson. If Il-nam was In-ho's father, he should be Jun-ho's as well.

That doesn't fully rule out the theory: it's possible that Il-nam abandoned In-ho with Jun-ho's mother, and that he didn't raise Jun-ho or consider him a son. Still, there's not much to go on.

If In-ho were Il-nam's son, the implications would be severe depending on the strength of their relationship as adults and if they knew of the others' existence before In-ho entered the games. At worst, it would mean that Il-nam didn't provide his son the money to save his wife's life, and knowingly let him participate in the games. At best, it would mean that they reunited after In-ho joined, and won, the games in 2015.

Furthermore, Il-nam and In-ho give the same surname, Oh, in the games, but they don't share one in real life. Il-nam tells Gi-hun in the season one finale that he didn't lie about his name in the games, but as far as we know, In-ho is lying about his: In-ho's true last name, which he shares with his brother, is Hwang.

Ultimately, it's not impossible that In-ho is Il-nam's son, but the evidence is far from conclusive. The milk thing is weird, sure — but lactose intolerance does not a paternal relationship make. After that cliffhanger ending, we'll have to wait for season three to see if the show goes any further with this particular thread.

"Squid Game" is streaming on Netflix.

• Microsoft managers use forms to requests retention bonuses for employee they can't afford to lose.
• One such document, viewed by BI includes, a field specific to employees' AI contributions.
• Microsoft AI employees earn a lot more than colleagues, according to payroll data viewed by BI.

Some managers at Microsoft may be trying harder to retain talented employees with AI know-how, according to an internal document viewed by Business Insider.

Microsoft managers use these types of documents to make the case for retention bonuses. Prompts include questions such as "What harm is done if employee leaves Microsoft?"

Managers can request special stock or cash awards to help keep employees who are most important to the company's strategy. One such document viewed by BI includes a separate field specific to employees' contributions in AI.

"In the context of AI transformation as a key priority, please indicate if this individual is critical AI talent and share the risk to the AI initiative/s if talent is not retained," the document asks Microsoft managers.

This question was added to the document recently, according to a person familiar with the situation. It was prepared for a specific, large group inside Microsoft. However, it's unclear if the AI question is being added to similar retention documents in other parts of the company.

A Microsoft spokesperson said the company does not have a central form for special stock and cash award requests, and organizations and teams can choose whether to add different fields, depending on what their strategic priorities are.

Still, the addition of the AI question to this specific document suggests that the AI talent wars may be pushing some parts of Microsoft to do more to prevent poaching by rivals.

Google, OpenAI, Meta, and other tech companies are racing to develop the most powerful AI models and the best generative AI tools, and they need employees who know the technical details of how to craft these products. That's caused bidding wars for some talent, along with multimillion-dollar compensation packages sometimes.

The company has already prioritized AI talent when it comes to compensation.

As of September, average compensation in Microsoft's AI group was about 37% higher than the average for all of the company's US employees. Software engineers working in AI, for example, earned 48% more than the average software engineer at the company, according to a payroll spreadsheet shared with BI.

In 2023, during a leadership crisis at OpenAI, Microsoft CTO Kevin Scott said the software giant would hire hundreds of OpenAI employees and match their current compensation.

He made the announcement in the midst of job cuts and a salary freeze at Microsoft, which made some employees furious.

Are you a Microsoft employee or do you have insight to share? Contact reporter Ashley Stewart via the encrypted messaging app Signal (+1-425-344-8242) or email ([email protected]). Use a nonwork device.

• On Friday, the Supreme Court will hear oral arguments on the TikTok divest-or-ban law.
• TikTok is asking the court to pause its divestment deadline, set for January 19.
• Legal analysts told Business Insider that the company faces an uphill battle.

TikTok is fighting for its life as it faces a possible US ban in a little over a week. Today, it gets to argue its case before the Supreme Court.

The company is challenging a law that compels its Chinese owner, ByteDance, to divest from the US version of TikTok by January 19 or be forced to shut it down. It lost its case in the DC Circuit in December and is now appealing to the Supreme Court for an emergency injunction to pause its divestment deadline.

We'll post updates on the hearing here as they become available.

TikTok's prospects of getting more time don't look great, legal analysts told Business Insider.

Like the DC Circuit, the Supreme Court is likely to show deference to Congress on questions of national security, even in instances where First Amendment rights are at stake.

"It's going to be an uphill battle," G.S. Hans, a clinical professor of law at Cornell Law School, told BI. "TikTok lost 3-0 in the DC Circuit. They lost with a cross-ideological panel."

"If you're the company, you're hoping for a change of fortune," he added. "That's a tall order because of the general deference on natural security grounds to the political branches from the courts."

Matthew Schettenhelm, a litigation and policy analyst at Bloomberg Intelligence, described TikTok as an underdog in the case, estimating the company has a 30% chance of being rescued by the Supreme Court.

If TikTok fails to win more time through court intervention, its business partners like Apple, Google, and Oracle may cut ties with the app in the US after January 19 to comply with the law. Apple and Google host TikTok in their app stores, while Oracle works with TikTok to store its US user data. None of the three companies responded to requests for comment.

TikTok declined to comment on its plans for operating its app in the US if its appeal fails.

President-elect Donald Trump may also try to save TikTok, as he pledged to do during his campaign run. Trump filed an amicus brief on December 27 asking the Supreme Court to pause the deadline for a TikTok divestment so he can try to negotiate a political resolution once in office.

Why is TikTok facing a potential ban?

TikTok was included in the Protecting Americans from Foreign Adversary Controlled Applications Act that passed in April. The act sought to limit the influence of social apps with ties to countries the US deemed a foreign adversary in an effort to guard national-security interests. TikTok's owner, ByteDance, is headquartered in China, which the US government has called a foreign adversary.

While members of both parties in Congress have raised alarm bells about TikTok, support for a ban among the American public has declined over the last couple of years. Support for a government ban fell from 50% in March 2023 to 32% last July and August among US adults who responded to Pew Research Center surveys.

• Copilot is Microsoft's generative AI tool now featured in much of its productivity programs.
• Copilot can draft text, analyze information and data, and suggest ideas.
• Copilot has also been plagued with security issues, and customers have criticized its effectiveness.

The entire tech industry is mired in an AI arms race, and Microsoft bet big on Copilot, its generative artificial intelligence chatbot.

Microsoft released Copilot in 2023, and rapidly rolled it out across various products and softwares. The company markets Copilot as a tool to help users with productivity tasks such as drafting a memo for work, adding to or amending hectic calendars, analyzing a spreadsheet or a few lines of code, or even writing a poem or short story.

By combing the vastness of the internet in fractions of a second to source troves of information and then engaging in machine learning and informed prediction, Copilot can create content; it can analyze, interpret, and explain extant data; and it can create systems for planning and managing many aspects of your life, from work to recreation to hobbies and more.

"We believe Copilot will be the new UI that helps you gain access to the world's knowledge and your organization's knowledge, but most importantly, it will be your agent that helps you act on that knowledge," Microsoft CEO Satya Nadella said during a keynote address at Microsoft's annual Microsoft Ignite business conference in November 2023.

Not long after Copilot's launch, industry experts predicted that for the fiscal year 2024, Copilot would generate billions for the company. However, the AI tool is not without its flaws. Customers and company insiders have criticized Copilot for its ineffectiveness and cost, and IT leaders have questioned its value to their companies; the widespread disappointment in Copilot has raised doubts over its long-term profitability.

What is Microsoft Copilot AI?

Microsoft Copilot is an AI-powered chatbot that relies on large language models (often shorted to LLMs) to help users with productivity and content creation tasks. The more you use it, the more it learns about your interests, preferences, and habits, and the better it tailors itself to serving your needs. It's available for use on Windows, Macs, and both the Apple iOS, and Android mobile platforms.

You can use Microsoft Copilot in many programs that you likely already use, including Microsoft Teams, Microsoft Word, Microsoft Excel, Microsoft PowerPoint, OneNote, Outlook, and more. It can assist you in rapidly creating and editing documents, spreadsheets, presentations, and more, acting both as your content creator and an editor and sort of AI coworker.

The basic version of Microsoft Copilot is free to use on the web, in Windows, with a Mac OS, and with Android and iOS. The free version includes access to GPT-4, GPT-4 Turbo, and GPT-4o during non-peak times. It also allows users to create and edit AI images, use plugins, and more.

However, there is also a paid version of Copilot called Copilot Pro, which offers more advanced features and better access. Copilot Pro includes all the features of the free version, plus priority model access and the ability to use Copilot in Microsoft apps like Word, Excel, PowerPoint, Outlook, and OneNote.

To use Copilot Pro, you need a Microsoft 365 Personal or Family subscription, which costs $6.99 per month for a personal subscription and $9.99 per month for a family subscription, good for up to six users. With Copilot Pro added, the total cost is around $26.99 per month.

Is Microsoft Copilot better than ChatGPT?

In some ways and for some uses, Copilot can be more effective than ChatGPT. Copilot is better for quick, tactical tasks that come about during your workflow, while ChatGPT is more commonly used for broader tasks and conversational AI, like for writing a creative story or rehearsing before a meeting or interview.

Copilot is part of the Microsoft ecosystem and can easily pull information from across Microsoft applications, which can be helpful, and it can also reply to questions with visual responses, such as photos and images. Also, unlike ChatGPT, which doesn't provide sources for its responses, Copilot does, making cross-referencing and fact-checking easier. That said, the paid version of ChatGPT is only $20 a month, so it's $7 cheaper than Copilot Pro.

What are the risks of using Microsoft Copilot?

Using Microsoft Copilot can pose several risks, including data leakage. Customers have already raised multiple security issues with Copilot, and in some cases delayed deployment over the concerns.

Copilot can generate outputs that include sensitive data, which may be shared with the wrong audience as the AI simply doesn't know better. For example, while you use Microsoft Teams, Copilot could summarize conversations and record action items against your better judgement, which could accidentally reveal private information.

There is also the all-too-common human problem of over-reliance. As Copilot and other AI tools become increasingly integrated into daily life, users may unknowingly rely on it more, which could impact investment and strategic decisions, how they write and express themselves, and frankly how much creative and critical thinking they do.