• I tried chicken tenders at Sonic, KFC, & Smashburger to see which fast-food chain has the best ones.
• Smashburger's chicken tenders were large, generously breaded, and all-around excellent.
• However, I thought KFC's tenders were a disappointment in every way — including the price.

There are many fast-food chains out there, but it can be hard to know which place has the best flavor and value when it comes to chicken tenders.

So, I recently ordered chicken tenders from multiple chains — Kentucky Fried Chicken, Sonic, and Smashburger — to see which I preferred.

I ate them all plain (no dipping sauces), so nothing could influence the true flavor or texture. Here's how it went.

I started my fast-food tour at Smashburger.

Smashburger is a newer kid on the fast-food block. The first location opened in Denver in 2007, and there are now over 200 shops across the US and Canada.

I paid $8.68 for an order of chicken tenders, which came with three pieces.

Smashburger's chicken tenders were almost like mini fried chicken breasts.

Even though the order only came with three, the tenders were impressively big — easily twice as large as the other chains.

The breading was thick and crispy, and the flavor profile was savory and lightly salty. Still, the tenders were begging for a dipping sauce, or even to be popped into a wrap or sandwich.

Despite that, I was entirely happy with Smashburger's tenders.

KFC was next on the list.

Contrary to its name, the first KFC franchise location opened in Salt Lake City in the 1950s. However, founder Harland "Colonel" Sanders laid the groundwork for the chain in Kentucky a few decades earlier.

My order of three chicken tenders cost me $8.90, making them the most expensive, but they also came with a biscuit.

KFC's chicken tenders let me down.

For a fast-food chain named for its chicken, I was a little disappointed by its tenders.

To start, they were easily half the size of the ones from Smashburger, and they appeared to be unevenly breaded.

They tasted salty but otherwise unremarkable. Sauce would definitely help, but the texture was a bit of a dealbreaker for me — I found the tenders a little tough and chewy.

I even took bites of each one to make sure I didn't just get a proverbial bad apple.

Sonic had the cheapest tenders.

Sonic is an Oklahoma-based fast-food chain that's known for its drive-in and drive-thru options. Customers don't actually go inside to order or eat.

A five-piece order of chicken tenders cost me $6.83, making it the cheapest of the bunch.

Sonic's chicken tenders are well-priced and good enough for a repeat purchase.

Sonic's tenders were much smaller than those from Smashburger — but there were five of them, so I still felt like I was getting my money's worth.

The texture of the chicken was — true to its name — tender. The breading, however, was on the thinner side, and there wasn't much flavor beyond a mild saltiness.

I think tenders really are meant to be enjoyed with sauce, and the uniform narrowness of these makes them especially good for dipping or putting in a wrap.

Overall, there was a clear winner for me.

Without a doubt, Smashburger had my favorite chicken tenders. They were massive, and I liked the generous amount of breading.

I'm sure I'll get them again — though next time, I'll probably try ordering the chain's spicy tenders for more flavor.

On the other side of the scale, I won't be going back to KFC for tenders. They were the most expensive, and I got the least amount of chicken. Even with a biscuit, the value just wasn't there for me.

Sonic may not have been my top choice, but I still think its chicken tenders are a good deal. They were cheap, and they're a great size and shape for dipping.

• A Chinese navy flotilla conducted a live-fire exercise off the Australian coast on Friday.
• A Virgin Australia pilot informed air traffic control after hearing a radio broadcast.
• The warning triggered 49 flights to divert as a hazard alert commenced.

Dozens of flights were forced to divert after a pilot warned air traffic control about a Chinese navy live-firing exercise off the Australian coast.

Authorities were unaware of the exercise until a pilot raised the alarm on Friday.

Rob Sharp, the CEO of Airservices Australia, the government agency responsible for air safety, gave evidence to a Senate hearing in Canberra on Monday. "It was, in fact, a Virgin Australia aircraft that advised one of our air traffic controllers that a foreign warship was broadcasting that they were conducting live firing 300 nautical miles off our coast," he said.

Task Group 107 of the People's Liberation Army Navy was operating off the New South Wales coast in the Tasman Sea, between Australia and New Zealand. It consisted of a frigate, a cruiser, and a replenishment vessel.

The Virgin Australia pilot heard one of the vessels broadcasting on the international guard frequency on Friday morning, said Peter Curran, Airservices Australia's deputy CEO.

He told the hearing that the government agency then commenced a hazard alert to warn all flights in the area.

It then advised the Department of Defence's Headquarters Joint Operations Command. "Bearing in mind at that stage, we didn't know if it was a hoax or real," Curran said.

Twenty minutes after the Virgin pilot's warning, an Emirates aircraft also made contact with the Chinese flotilla. It heard the radio broadcast advising that live firing was taking place between 9:30 a.m. and 2 p.m. local time.

Some 49 aircraft were diverted over the course of Friday, Curran said.

That included some that were already in the air when the hazard alert was issued, but were flights later in the day that adjusted their route to avoid the airspace.

Flight plans continued to divert throughout the weekend as a matter of precaution, he added.

The incident sparked diplomatic tensions over the weekend.

A spokesperson for Australia's defence minister, Richard Marles, told Guardian Australia: "The Australian Government has raised its concern with the lack of notice on the live fire activity from the Chinese Government, including through appropriate channels in Canberra and Beijing."

Wu Qian, a spokesperson for China's Ministry of National Defense, said in a statement that the drill would not impact aviation safety.

He added that it took place in international waters and safety notices were issued in advance.

"Australia has unjustly criticized China and deliberately exaggerated the issue," Wu said.

Reuters reported that New Zealand Prime Minister Christopher Luxon said the live-fire exercise complied with international law, adding: "The issue for us is … we'd appreciate a little bit more advance notice, particularly on what is a busy air route."

Australia's Department of Defence said it was continuing to monitor Task Group 107 as it re-entered Australia's exclusive economic zone early on Tuesday.

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

Good morning! Fyre Festival is back, and it's officially got a date and location. The sequel to the infamous festival will occur from May 30 to June 2 in Isla Mujeres, Mexico. Additional details are scant, but I'm sure that's definitely not a red flag.

In today's big story, the debate continues over how best to respond to DOGE's "What did you do last week?" email. (Got an opinion? We want to hear from you.)

What's on deck

Markets: Jamie Dimon's sorry about cursing, but he still wants you back in the office.

Tech: AI could spell trouble for some software engineers, but it's far from a death knell for the entire profession.

Business: For these companies, layoffs are never an option.

But first, singing for my supper.

If this was forwarded to you, sign up here.

The big story

Dealing with DOGE

From "Should they stay or should they go?" to "Should they send or just no-show?"

A few weeks after considering buyout offers, federal workers faced another dilemma: Responding to Elon Musk's "What did you do last week?" email.

The message, which asked federal workers to reply with five accomplishments from the previous week, left Washington in chaos.

Agencies differed on their recommendations to employees before the deadline, which was yesterday at 11:59 p.m. The deadline may have passed — but conflicting guidance persists.

The Social Security Administration initially told workers it was "an opportunity to highlight the important work you do." Although it later clarified that responses were voluntary.

The Department of Defense was less welcoming. The Pentagon publicly told its employees to "pause any response" to the email, adding that it "is responsible for reviewing the performance of its personnel."

Of course, it wouldn't be a DOGE mandate without getting the lawyers involved.

All of that begs the question: What would YOU do?

Business Insider's Katie Notopoulos, who wrote about how people might choose to respond to the email, wants to hear from you. She created a nifty form for you to share how you might respond.

Interest in DOGE, for better or worse, doesn't seem to be waning.

President Donald Trump's political operation is actually selling DOGE membership cards. For only a $47 donation, you can be the proud owner of a black metal card that says "Trump DOGE member." There are also t-shirts for $40 or $28.

Jamie Dimon is hopeful DOGE will be successful. "More effective government — more efficient government — isn't bad. It's actually a good thing," the JPMorgan CEO said in a recent interview.

Meanwhile, Rep. Rich McCormick said he's worried DOGE might be moving too quickly after getting an earful from his constituents at a recent town hall. The Georgia Republican said he's "not against anything he's doing," but added that he's "concerned that maybe we're moving a little bit too fast."

And then sometimes things are just getting plain weird. Some Department of Housing and Urban Development employees had a brutal start to their day on Monday. TVs in the office were showing an AI-generated video of President Trump sucking Musk's toes underneath a text that read, "LONG LIVE THE REAL KING."

News brief

• Starbucks is laying off 1,100 corporate staff this week.
• Sam Bankman-Fried's long-dormant X account is alive again — and posting about DOGE and leadership advice.
• Joann plans to go out of business and close all remaining fabric and craft stores.
• Microsoft stock slips after analysts say it canceled two AI data center leases, suggesting possible 'oversupply position.'
• The agency that regulates vehicle safety — and Elon Musk's Tesla — is another target of DOGE layoffs.
• Advertisers hit back at Rumble lawsuit in a new filing, calling it an attempt to 'weaponize' antitrust laws.
• Grok briefly censored criticism of Musk and Trump. It was blamed on a new hire who hadn't 'fully absorbed' the startup's culture.

3 things in markets

1. YOLO traders can now literally bet the farm. The CME Group debuted a suite of agricultural "micro" contracts one-tenth the size of corn, wheat, and soybean futures. The move is part of CME's larger plan to pull retail investors into a market largely dominated by institutional players. On top of offering more opportunities to a wider part of the market, these bite-size options can also help smaller farmers.

2. The markets are about to feel the burn of Trump's policies, Steve Cohen says. The billionaire Point72 founder warned that slowing immigration, tariffs, and cuts to government spending could slow economic growth and create a "significant correction." For investors, the best may be behind them.

3. Jamie Dimon is sorry … but not about criticizing WFH. The JPMorgan CEO apologized for cursing during a fiery rant he made against remote work at an internal town hall meeting that was leaked. But he didn't back down from his main point about the importance of in-office attendance: "I'm not against work from home. I'm against where it doesn't work."

3 things in tech

1. The AI coding apocalypse. Generative AI is beginning to shake up the engineering profession and entry-level coders could pay the price. The recent changes have software engineers worried they're coding themselves into obsolescence. But industry experts say that's unlikely to happen anytime soon. Plus, there's more to the job than just writing code — and AI has yet to catch up.

2. Donald Trump doesn't want anyone regulating Big Tech but himself. Last week, the president seemed to issue conflicting messages. On the one hand, he criticized European regulators for being too harsh on US tech companies. On the other hand, the Trump administration said it would regulate American tech companies because they have "too much power." BI's Peter Kafka breaks down what it all means.

3. Elon Musk isn't the only one who hates OpenAI's for-profit plan. Sam Altman is trying to transform OpenAI from a non-profit into a more conventional business, but the process is complicated thanks to its complex corporate structure. Musk, an OpenAI cofounder who split from Altman, has vocally opposed OpenAI's plan. He's not alone, with a growing chorus of entrepreneurs, companies, and charities saying it could be a grave mistake for the AI leader.

3 things in business

1. POV: Your company has never conducted layoffs. Companies laying off their employees — even outside a recession — have become commonplace in the professional world. But some purposefully refrain from making cuts. Not only is the no-layoff approach good for employees, but the CEOs of these companies said they think it's good for business, too.

2. MrBeast's secrets to success. The YouTuber knows the negativity he receives — from viewers and former employees — is part of the job. But in a recent interview on "The Diary of a CEO" podcast, MrBeast said it's helped him cultivate a stronger sense of self. He shared some key traits to his success, like his propensity for risk and what he looks for when hiring.

3. AT&T and Verizon's rivalry takes a modern twist. While AT&T navigates a rocky return to office, Verizon is seemingly looking to capitalize on its rivals' employees who aren't as keen on the mandate. In a recruiting email obtained by BI, Verizon's talent team encouraged AT&T workers to check out the company's hybrid and remote job opportunities. The outreach highlights how RTO mandates have become a sticking point for workers recently.

In other news

• Coffee is about to get way more expensive — and mediocre.
• Video: Satellite images show reality of Saudi Arabia's $2 trillion megacity.
• Palantir CEO Alex Karp reveals what he would do if he weren't running the company.
• Shopify acquihired six startups for their AI talent last year as it competes in a 'white-hot' market.
• Four charts show how Warren Buffett's Berkshire Hathaway piled up cash, dumped stocks, and made a record tax payment in 2024.
• Hedge funds are trimming their Magnificent 7 holdings — here's what they're buying instead.
• Starbucks is removing these 13 menu items from its menu next week
• Apple braces for DEI showdown at annual shareholder meeting.

What's happening today

• Apple shareholders vote on whether to abolish DEI program.

The Insider Today team: Dan DeFrancesco, deputy editor and anchor, in New York. Grace Lett, editor, in Chicago. Ella Hopkins, associate editor, in London. Hallam Bullock, senior editor, in London. Amanda Yen, associate editor, in New York. Elizabeth Casolo, fellow, in Chicago.

• Tesla is rolling out self-driving features to some cars in China, per a software update log.
• It's not being called Full Self-Driving and Tesla is not offering all the FSD features as in the US.
• BYD is equipping nearly all its models with advanced self-driving tech at no extra cost.

Tesla has started rolling out driving-assistance features to some cars in China that are similar to the Full Self-Driving (FSD) system in the US, according to a software update log.

Tesla said the new features allow Tesla owners in China to use driver-assist features on controlled-access and city roads. These include guiding vehicles to exit ramps and intersections, recognizing traffic signals, making turns, and managing lane changes and speed adjustments.

It does not incorporate all of Tesla's FSD features, including autonomously navigating complex urban environments such as parking lots. Tesla is not branding it as Full Self-Driving.

"For some features, the time of implementation and results may vary based on the vehicle's model and configuration," the company said, adding that the range of models will be gradually expanded.

Bloomberg first reported Tesla's planned deployment of FSD features in China.

The move comes after BYD, Tesla's biggest rival in China, announced earlier this month that it would equip nearly all its models with advanced self-driving tech at no extra cost, and other rivals followed suit.

In contrast, Tesla owners in China have had to pay about $8,800 extra for self-driving features — a sum nearly as high as the cost of BYD's cheapest model.

BYD has racing ahead in China's fiercely competitive EV market. In January it sold sold nearly twice as many EVs as Tesla, with the US carmaker's sales down 11% compared with the same month in 2024.

BYD sold a record 66,000 vehicles outside China in January, indicating that a push to expand outside its home market is starting to pay off.

Last month, BYD overtook Toyota to become Singapore's best-selling car brand and also beat Tesla in the UK for the first time.

Other Chinese brands such as NIO, XPeng, MG, and ORA are also notching up higher sales of their affordable electric and hybrid vehicles outside China amid intense competition in the domestic market.

• Home Depot beat Wall Street revenue forecasts for the fourth quarter of 2024.
• The retailer said, however, that customers are still putting off major renovation projects.
• That's due to higher interest rates in recent years, its CEO and CFO said.

Home Depot beat Wall Street estimates in the fourth quarter of 2024, but said that customers were still putting off bigger home improvement projects amid higher interest rates.

Revenue climbed 14% compared to the same period in 2023. On a comparable sales basis, a metric that strips out new store openings and other one-off events, revenue was up by 0.8% globally and 1.3% in the US.

The Atlanta-headquartered firm reported revenue of $39.7 billion for the fourth quarter of 2024. Analysts had forecast revenue of $39.2 billion.

CEO Ted Decker put the company's better-than-expected revenue down to "greater engagement" in home improvement spending. However, he noted that Home Depot was seeing "ongoing pressure" on business related to larger-scale home renovations.

"A higher interest rate environment" had "impacted home improvement demand," Decker added.

In an interview with CNBC, CFO Richard McPhail said the company expects demand to return as higher rates become the "new normal."

"Home improvement always persists, and so the question, I think, will be around the mindset of whether long-term rates have gotten to a new normal," McPhail said.

The Federal Reserve's key interest rate, which sets a general baseline for all US interest rates, reached 5.5% between July 2023 and August 2024. Though it has been cut to 4.5% in recent months, it remains elevated compared to the near-zero rates seen in the US since the 2008 financial crisis.

While Home Depot reported marginally better-than-expected revenues, its 2025 forecasts fell short of investor expectations. The company said it expected sales growth of 2.8% and comparable sales growth of 1%, compared to analyst forecasts of 3.3% and 1.9% growth, respectively.

Shares dropped in premarket trading on lower-than-expected growth forecasts. They fell as much as 3.8% but recovered a little, and as of around 7:30 a.m. ET, they were set to open down around 0.6%.

Home Depot said it expects an operating margin of roughly 33% in 2025. The home improvement retailer also announced plans to open 13 new stores.

• Tesla's European sales plunged in January, falling 45% compared with the same month in 2024.
• The decline came despite a rise in EV sales in Europe, with Tesla falling behind China's SAIC Motor.
• Elon Musk has waded into European politics in recent months, backing far right-wing German party AfD.

Tesla sales in Europe plunged in January, falling 45% compared with the same month last year, while overall sales of electric vehicles increased.

Elon Musk's automaker sold 9,945 vehicles last month in the European Union and UK, Iceland, Liechtenstein, Norway, and Switzerland, figures from European Automotive Manufacturers' Association showed. There were 18,161 sales in January 2024.

In December Tesla sold 44,697 vehicles across the same markets.

Tesla had a 1% market share in January, down from 1.8% in the same month last year.

That decline put it behind China's SAIC Motor, whose sales grew 37% to nearly 17,000 vehicles in January under brands including MG. The company had a 2.3% market share, up from 1.7%. It sells petrol and hybrid cars as well as EVs.

Chinese EV giant BYD also outsold Tesla in the UK for the first time in January, according to separate industry data, as China's EV makers continue to put Musk's company under pressure.

Tesla, which recorded its first annual fall in sales last year, is changing over assembly lines at its factory near Berlin as it prepares to start building the revamped Model Y this year.

Overall sales of battery electric vehicles jumped 34% to 124,341 in Europe last month, giving the category a 15% market share, up from 10.9% in January 2024.

Tesla's declines follow Musk's decision to wade into European politics in recent months, and he endorsed Germany's far-right AfD party ahead of last Sunday's elections.

The AfD won the second-highest share in the election, but seems unlikely to form part of the next government.

The billionaire spoke virtually at campaign events for the anti-immigrant and anti-European Union party. AfD leader Alice Weidel said Musk called to congratulate her after the party's historic election performance.

Musk's involvement in European politics has sparked public backlash, protests, and isolated acts of vandalism.

Last month, activists projected an image of a controversial gesture the Tesla CEO made at an event marking President Donald Trump's inauguration, which some interpreted as a fascist salute, onto the company's Berlin factory. A Tesla showroom in the Netherlands was also vandalized with spray-painted swastikas, Politico reported.

Tesla did not immediately respond to a request for comment.

• Moon mining could become a multibillion-dollar industry.
• The moon holds resources like rare earth elements, water ice, and helium-3.
• But astronomists say large-scale lunar mining could be bad news for scientific research.

Mining the moon for water, helium-3, and rare earth elements could become a multibillion-dollar industry in the near future, but astronomers warn it risks coming at the expense of scientific discovery.

The NASA-sponsored Jet Propulsion Laboratory estimates that the moon holds untapped resources worth hundreds of billions of dollars.

These include water ice, which could support lunar habitation or be converted into rocket fuel, and rare earth elements, which are a key component in modern electronics.

Perhaps the most lucrative lunar prospect is helium-3, a non-radioactive isotope that holds the potential to be used for nuclear fission.

Helium-3 traded for about $2,500 per liter in 2024, according to the Edelgas Group.

"That's a huge market, in principle, and something is coming along very fast," Martin Elvis, a senior astrophysicist at the Smithsonian Astrophysical Observatory, told Business Insider.

He also said that lunar law is "very much" like the Wild West, where a "bad incentive" now exists that encourages those who reach mining sites first to "exploit" them quickly before anyone can catch up.

Resource-rich, scientifically valuable

NASA, China, and several private companies aim to mine the moon within the next decade. However, astronomers warn that large-scale operations there could make studying the universe more challenging.

The moon has scientifically significant sites that could also be rich in lunar resources, creating a potential clash between money-making ventures and scientific research.

These areas include the far side of the moon, a radio-quiet environment ideal for studying the cosmic Dark Ages, the time before there were stars and galaxies.

Elvis said the moon's permanently shadowed regions near its poles are also "special places for astronomy." But they're believed to be rich in water ice — crucial for future space exploration — once again making them highly valuable for resource extraction.

Ongoing human activities, such as water extraction or deploying rovers for mineral mining, could introduce vibrations that disrupt delicate lunar studies, Elvis said.

"Mining for water is probably the worst," he added.

A loose legal framework

While legal frameworks exist — such as the Artemis Accords, a non-binding set of principles established in 2020 and signed by over 50 countries — Robert Massey, deputy executive director of the Royal Astronomical Society, told BI these agreements come with their own challenges.

One of the details of the Artemis Accords was actually explicitly permitting space mining, provided it complies with the Outer Space Treaty of 1967 and is done in a "safe and sustainable" way, he said, "effectively allowing people to set up camps in different places on the moon to extract resources."

According to Elvis, there is a relatively brief window of time to "inject the need for science" into the lunar mining debate. One suggestion he had was introducing protected planetary parks on the moon's surface.

Massey, meanwhile, stressed that any future regulations should emphasize astronomy's value and better protect scientific research, rather than focusing solely on the financial prospects.

"There should be more stakeholders than just the wealthy and companies that want to do this," he said, adding: "The stakeholders ought to include all of us — just as all of us have a stake in terrestrial environments."

• Some Gen Z workers are finding it hard to get into the workforce due to the demands of "entry-level" jobs.
• Leaders should value Gen Z's creativity and entrepreneurialism, not base decisions on "young-ism."
• Zoomers can push back against stereotypes by going into the office and listening to older colleagues.

Plenty of entry-level jobs are no longer entry-level.

Mona Mourshed, the CEO of the employment nonprofit Generation, said many employers are now looking for two to three years of work experience for such roles.

"Job vacancies are down for entry-level roles, and that's true across the world," she told Business Insider. "Then, on top of it, to get those job vacancies, hiring requirements have gone up."

Labor market commentators previously told BI there's a surplus of available workers, and this is only getting more true as highly skilled employees are being laid off from the likes of Meta, Google — and the federal government.

The "unbossing" of the workplace is also likely a factor, with millennial middle managers being squeezed out in the "Great Flattening" and wading into the hiring pool. Without these people in companies and mentoring junior employees, more experience is necessary for new hires to thrive.

The group most likely to be affected is Gen Z — the youngest cohort of workers, which is also set to make up 30% of the workforce by 2030.

Making it harder for young workers to find jobs could be short-sighted. "They tend to be entrepreneurial in spirit, they collaborate with their peers, and they embrace diversity," said Stephanie Chung, JetSuit's former president and the author of "Ally Leadership: How to Lead People Who Are Not Like You."

"The older generations need to come to grips that there are many ways to achieve the goal and that their way of working is one way," she told BI. "It's not the only way. "

Mourshed said most entry-level roles are not what they used to be: "When you went through a training, or you have a degree or a certificate, and you're seeking to get your first work experience — that's gone."

'Young-ism' on the rise

There are many influences at play, including negative stereotypes about Gen Z's work ethic and the balance tipping in favor of employers, making room for experienced talent over "underperformers."

Jennifer Moss, a workplace culture strategist and author of "WHY ARE WE HERE?: Creating a Work Culture Everyone Wants," told BI that "young-ism" is on the rise.

Gen Zers are sometimes labeled difficult, demanding, and even weird in interviews. Many are fed up with work and don't want to climb the corporate ladder, thinking the juice isn't worth the squeeze.

Some attribute this to the pandemic and being stuck at home in some of their most formative years. Moss thinks Gen Zers actually became more ambitious after lockdowns and now seek lives with purpose.

"This can be a great driver of engagement and lots of really positive business outcomes," she said.

Chung said employees hiring for entry-level roles should consider Gen Z's positives, such as their ability to think outside the box, courage to take calculated risks, and that they are "super collaborators."

"These folks collaborate on everything from school projects, to slaying dragons while immersed in a fictitious game," she said. "Gen Z sees collaborating as a way of life — they don't know anything different."

Leaders create a company's culture, so they need to address workplace disengagement, said Leena Rinne, a VP at online learning platform Skillsoft.

"Feeling that Gen Z doesn't have a work ethic, that they're entitled, that they lack motivation — those can be addressed through leadership," she told BI. "If we believe those are learnable skills, then as an organization, as leaders, we should be investing in Gen Z to actually be able to do it."

Forging connections

Gen Zers can fight back against negative stereotypes, by realizing that technology cannot replace experience, Chung said.

Older generations have significant knowledge "that doesn't always get captured by computers," she said.

Going to the office more often is another good idea, in Chung's view, given the opportunities for forging connections and ad-hoc learning.

"Sometimes simply being present can lead to impromptu conversations that may enhance your thinking or change the trajectory of your career," she said.

Chung thinks workers should ask what they can gain from interacting with those outside their cohort. "Everyone can learn something from anyone if they're willing to try. All generations add value to a company — how do we both win?"

• A Delta flight made an emergency landing just 10 minutes after takeoff.
• In air traffic control audio, one of the flight's pilots can be heard saying there is smoke in the cabin.
• Footage and images shared on social media showed passengers evacuating onto the tarmac.

A Delta Air Lines flight was evacuated after the pilot reported smoke in the cabin on Monday morning.

The Boeing 717 was set to fly from Atlanta's Hartsfield-Jackson International Airport to Columbia, South Carolina, operating as Flight 876.

But data from Flightradar24 shows it started to turn back around five minutes after taking off from the world's busiest airport. In total, it was in the air for just over 10 minutes.

In communications published by LiveATC.net, one of the pilots can be heard declaring an emergency after ascending to 3,000 feet.

"Got smoke in the cabin and need to plan a return back," he says. "Have the fire trucks roll for us, please."

He added that there were 99 people on board.

Images shared on social media appear to show passengers evacuating after landing safely, with people standing on the wings and a slide deployed from the 717's tail.

The Federal Aviation Administration said the plane returned safely "after the crew reported possible smoke in the flight deck."

It added that the FAA will investigate the incident.

"The flight crew followed procedures to return to Atlanta when a haze inside the aircraft was observed after departure," Delta said in a statement shared with a number of media outlets.

"Nothing is more important than the safety of our customers and people, and we apologize to our customers for the experience," the airline said.

Delta did not immediately respond to a request for comment from Business Insider.

• Verizon is seemingly looking to capitalize on rival AT&T's full-time RTO mandate.
• In a recruiting email, Verizon mentions remote and hybrid openings amid "changing RTO policies across the industry."
• AT&T told BI that its workers "always have a choice" about what company to work for.

The rivalry between two of telecom's biggest players has taken a decidedly modern twist.

Verizon is seemingly looking to capitalize on rival AT&T's full-time RTO mandate by reaching out to AT&T employees who may not be keen on working five days a week in the office.

In an email sent to multiple AT&T employees obtained by Business Insider, Verizon's talent team encouraged recipients to explore the company's hybrid and remote job opportunities.

"Following the news of changing RTO policies across the industry, we're reaching out to share helpful resources and potential hybrid/remote job opportunities across Verizon," the email said.

"If you have been personally affected by organizational policy changes or know anyone who has, we're looking to add top talent to the V Team," the email continued. Verizon declined to comment.

While it's common for companies to recruit from their competitors, Verizon's outreach highlights how 5-day office mandates have become a sticking point for some workers in recent months.

AT&T told BI that its workers "always have a choice to pick the type of company and work environment they wish to be part of."

"We desire individuals who wish to work in a dynamic and challenging team environment with strong relationships and collaboration fostered by in-office constructs," AT&T added.

The recruiting message comes as AT&T has had to navigate a rocky return to office this year, with some employees describing to BI a lack of desk space, parking shortages, and shifting guidance about the policy.

As of Monday afternoon, Verizon's job listings website showed openings for more than 1,200 roles across the US, of which 10 were remote. Listings for several full-time positions require eight days in the office per month, as determined by a manager.

The Verizon email also references the company's support of DEI at a time when other large employers are backing away from the phrase.

"If you're looking for a culture of learning that fosters diversity, equity, and inclusion with room to grow, our V Team may be the place for you," the email said.

Verizon job perks include up to $8,000 of annual tuition assistance, up to 5 weeks of paid time off, paid parental leave, as well as medical, dental, and vision coverage, the email said.

While AT&T traces its origins to 1885, Verizon was formed in 2000 when one of the so-called Baby Bells — spun off from AT&T in the 1980s — merged with GTE.

More recently, the two have been in a race to build out the nation's fiber optic network and extend 5G and satellite coverage.

And although AT&T is now based in Dallas, its former New Jersey headquarters is now a major corporate campus for Verizon — not to be confused with Bell Labs in Holmdel, which features in Apple TV's "Severance."

If you are an AT&T worker who wants to share your perspective, please contact Dominick via email or text/call/Signal at 646.768.4750. Responses will be kept confidential, and Business Insider strongly recommends using a personal email and a non-work device when reaching out

• For my first overnight Amtrak ride in 2021, I booked a roomette on a Viewliner train.
• Then, in 2025, I booked a roomette on a newly upgraded Superliner train.
• The rooms had similar layouts, but modern upgrades made the second ride much cozier.

I'll never forget my first overnight train trip in October 2021.

I took an Amtrak Viewliner train from my home in New York City to Miami and spent the 30-hour ride in a roomette — a 20-square-foot private cabin — for $500.

After spending the next three years sampling sleeper trains in Europe, I took another long-haul Amtrak journey from Denver to Salt Lake City in January. This ride was on a Superliner train, and it was only 15 hours.

I booked the same accommodation — a roomette for $400 — which had the same basic layout with a couple of differences.

Overall, the second roomette had modern updates, making my train ride more comfortable.

Amtrak sleeper trains from east to west

Amtrak's Viewliner fleet takes overnight riders through the eastern and southern US, and the train line's Superliner fleet carries passengers west of Chicago and New Orleans.

The main difference between the two fleets is size. The Viewliner is a one-story train, while the Superliner is two stories and includes an additional communal car on the top floor for sightseeing.

Amtrak is updating the roughly 30-to-50-year-old Superliner cars, and about 76% of the fleet has already been refreshed, including the train I took, Amtrak spokesman Marc Magliari told Business Insider.

The Viewliners are a bit newer than the Superliner cars — the first Viewliner train was delivered in the late '90s, according to Magliari. Still, he said many of the one-story trains would also get an interior update in 2026.

Viewliner vs. Superliner roomettes

Before we get into the upgrades, there is a notable difference between the roomettes on these two trains.

Both roomettes sleep up to two people, with two chairs forming a lower bunk and another pulling down from the ceiling. They both also have mirrors, small closets, and pullout tables.

Some Viewliner roomettes also squeeze in a toilet, and they all include a sink, so travelers don't have to use the shared bathrooms in the car.

The Superliner roomettes don't have plumbing, so guests must use the shared bathrooms.

Fresh seat cushions

The most important upgrade to me was the seats.

When I stepped inside the Superliner roomette, I immediately noticed the seats looked like they'd never been used.

I'm sure that's not true, but I didn't find one sign of wear or crust of dirt on either seat. Sitting in one for the first time felt like sampling a recliner at a furniture store.

Magliari told BI that the old blue cloth seats had been replaced with soft vinyl.

"The seats have the same frame, but the cushions are new. And there's more lumbar support in this current seat cushion design than the old seat cushion design," he said. "If you see gray, vinyl seating, then you know that you are in a fresh room."

A comfy seat makes a cozy bed

My upper bunk on the Viewliner felt like a cot, and my lower bunk on the Superliner felt more like a mattress.

I selected the upper bunk in the Viewliner roomette because I'd never been on an overnight train before, and sleeping up top felt more adventurous.

It kind of was — but not in a good way. The suspended bunk shook throughout the night from the turbulence of the train. I couldn't find a comfortable position on the stiff mattress and tossed and turned through the night.

I haven't slept on a train's top bunk since, but being on the ground wasn't the only thing that made the Superliner bunk feel more like a bed. The reclined seat cushions had a bit more give to them, and the soft vinyl felt smoother on my skin.

Seeing the difference in comfort after four years got me stoked about the future of overnight Amtrak travel.

In the future, you'll catch me on an upgraded Viewliner.

• Ukraine has become the largest producer of tactical and strategic drones, its defense minister said.
• Ukraine has ramped up its drone production since the start of Russia's full-scale invasion in 2022.
• In total, Ukraine delivered over 1.3 million drones to soldiers in 2024, its commander in chief said.

Ukraine has become the world's largest producer of key military-use drones, the country's defense minister said.

"We've become the biggest drone manufacturer in the world, drones of tactical and strategic level," Rustem Umerov said during a Sunday press conference at Ukraine's "Year 2025" forum.

Tactical drones support smaller-scale battlefield actions, often at close ranges, by gathering intelligence and supporting strikes, either as the munition or by providing targeting data.

Strategic drones, meanwhile, are often higher-end, high-altitude systems with the endurance to advance operations against higher-priority targets.

Speaking at the same press conference, Oleksandr Syrskyi, Ukraine's commander in chief, said the country delivered over 1.3 million drones to front-line soldiers in 2024. The general added that its long-range drones can strike targets up to 1,700 kilometers inside Russia.

At a separate press conference on Sunday, Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy said his country produced 2.2 million drones in total in 2024 and planned to ramp up production further in 2025.

Ukraine's defense ministry didn't respond to a Business Insider request for comment.

Up-to-date and comprehensive data on various countries' respective drone production is scarce, making direct comparisons difficult.

June 2024 data from Statista Market Insights, a data analysis service on market trends, said China was set to be the world's largest overall drone manufacturer in 2024 and was on track to produce 2.9 million drones. However, the data does not include drones for military purposes, though off-the-shelf drones for civilian use have been heavily repurposed for military use in Ukraine and further afield.

In September, Russian President Vladimir Putin said Russia was ramping up its own drone production to nearly 1.4 million in 2024, a tenfold increase from the previous year.

Drones are increasingly being used in conflicts around the world for intelligence and reconnaissance, bombing missions, precision strikes, and other military purposes by both state-level and non-state actors.

This has led to an increased demand for counter-drone capabilities.

In December, the Pentagon released a new counter-drone strategy aimed at coordinating how different branches of the US military are responding to the threat of drones and making "countering unmanned systems a key element of our thinking."

Drones have been a hallmark of the war in Ukraine, with both sides using the evolving technology to devastating effect.

Even so, Ukrainian tactical drones face significant challenges, according to a February report by the UK's Royal United Services Institute, with a 60-80% failure rate in hitting targets "depending on the part of the front and the skill of the operators."

Despite this, it said that they still account for 60 to 70% of damaged and destroyed Russian military systems.

In an October speech to executives from dozens of foreign arms manufacturers, Zelenskyy said Ukraine was capable of producing 4 million drones a year, up from the one million he predicted in December 2023.

Kyiv has tried to smooth the process of drone acquisitions for its troops.

Last week, Umerov said Ukraine's defense ministry was launching a new drone supply model to facilitate a "fast and uninterrupted supply of the best UAVs for our soldiers," and to provide its armed forces with an additional $60 million a month to purchase drones.

Ukraine's growing defense industry has led some to believe that drones, among other military capabilities, could play an important role in Ukraine's postwar economic recovery.

• Shawn Robertson's parents lived with him, his wife, and their kids for many years.
• He says there were plenty of benefits to living together, though there were challenges, too.
• There wasn't much privacy, but his parents got to spend time with their grandkids.

This as-told-to essay is based on a conversation with Shawn Robertson, a 55-year-old from Tsawwassen, British Columbia. It has been edited for length and clarity.

When my folks were still alive, they lived with us for many years. Multigenerational living had many perks, but it also had challenges.

I grew up in Tsawwassen, British Columbia, and lived in the same house my entire life. Around the time my wife Cori and I got engaged, both of my parents started experiencing health issues.

They told us they would have to sell the house and move into a graduated care facility for older people, but Cori and I agreed they should stay in the house for as long as possible. We believed it would be better for them health-wise. We also knew that if we didn't stay close to them when we started having kids, they wouldn't see their grandkids very often, as we'd likely end up settling in another part of Canada.

So right after we got married, Cori moved in, too, and we started taking care of Mom and Dad. Our house is a double-story building with five bedrooms and a den, so there was plenty of room for all of us.

There were plenty of benefits to living with my mom and dad

Mom and Dad shifted from the upstairs to the downstairs. It was easier for them not to have to walk up and down the stairs to get to their bedroom. Over the years, multigenerational living has had many positive aspects. When we welcomed our three sons and daughter, it meant that they spent plenty of quality time with our kids.

My folks were homebodies, so they didn't mind watching our kids or our pets. If we were running down to our trailer at Mt Baker and we asked them to watch the dogs for the weekend, it was never a problem. If we wanted to go out for dinner and leave the four kids with them, they never once said no.

I know some grandparents feel like they're taken advantage of in that regard, but my parents never felt that way. Their philosophy was the more time they had with the grandkids, the better. The kids kept them feeling young for as long as possible. Another benefit was that my parents never felt lonely.

My dad died in 2004 when the kids were still quite young, but my mom was a big part of their childhood. She was always present, and being right downstairs, my kids could spend time with her whenever they wanted. I think some of their fondest memories were of watching dog shows together and having tea with her, or playing outside while she watched on.

Some aspects of our situation were challenging, too

There were some challenges to multigenerational living, too. My parents never meddled in our affairs, but they did know all of our business as the house is very open. On occasion, they would let their opinions be known, even when they weren't asked for.

As the kids grew older and became teenagers, the lack of boundaries became more challenging. Sometimes, they'd be rushing in the morning to get to school, and Mom would ask them for help with something. They wouldn't want to tell her no, and it usually wasn't anything too big, but when you're on a time crunch and you're a teenager, everything seems like a hassle.

There were also budgetary impacts associated with multi-generational living. We bought food for my parents and never asked to be reimbursed. I also did renovations on the house. I figure we probably incurred about $75,000 in personal debt over the years.

In 2012, Mom slid off the side of the bed and was taken to hospital. She was diagnosed with double pneumonia and wasn't supposed to last the night, but ended up living for another three years.

That was the beginning of the end, though, and her health continued to decline. When we could no longer care for her, we decided it would be best for her to live in a care facility, where she lived for three years before she died in 2015.

Cori and I have always said given our time again, we'd make the same choice to live with my mom and dad. The kids had a better relationship with my folks as a result, and the benefits definitely outweighed the negatives in my mind.

But my advice to others who want to try multigenerational living is to have separate accommodation on-site, like a granny flat, with its own entrance. The lack of privacy can strain even the best of families. I'd also recommend both parties set some ground rooms from the outset.

• Norway's melting glaciers are revealing objects from the Stone Age, Iron Age, Medieval, and Viking eras.
• Some ancient artifacts are mysteries, but they still indicate trade routes through the mountains.
• Here's what Norway's glacial archaeologists found in the meltiest part of last summer.

Mysterious and fascinating artifacts are surfacing on melting glaciers across the planet.

From ancient human remains to strange wooden tools and statues, these objects are drawing archaeologists into the high, frozen mountains each year.

Norway is at the forefront of this emerging field of research, called glacial archaeology. With about 4,500 artifacts discovered, the country claims more than half of the planet's glacial archaeology findings, according to Espen Finstad, who co-leads the Norwegian program, called Secrets of the Ice.

Archaeologists there are piecing together clues about ancient industries and trade routes across the glaciers.

They just had one of their best field seasons yet. Here's what they found.

People have trekked over Norway's glaciers for thousands of years to sell and buy goods.

Ancient hunting, travel, and trade routes crossed the mountains between the Norwegian coast and inland areas since the Stone Age.

"We are lucky that some of these trade routes have gone over ice," Finstad told Business Insider.

Objects that ancient travelers left behind were frozen into the ice for centuries — until recent decades.

As humans have burned fossil fuels for energy, releasing heat-trapping gases into the atmosphere, global temperatures have been rising for decades. Glaciers everywhere are melting, releasing the ancient artifacts preserved inside them.

Some of these objects look familiar, like this mitten.

Others, like this whisk, are quite different from what we know today.

The Lendbreen ice patch is the most fruitful site the archaeologists visit.

"There are so many treasures in the ice there," Finstad said.

Lendbreen was a common travel route during the Viking and Medieval eras. The archaeologists go there almost every year.

In the summer of 2024, heavy melting meant lots of new discoveries.

"The melting really came rapidly at the end of the season," Finstad said.

Finstad's team of about seven archaeologists visited nearly a dozen sites across the mountains to search for artifacts.

At Lendbreen, they used pack horses to bring gear up to the site and set up their camp.

They stayed there about nine days, Finstad said.

Their findings included "two of the best-preserved arrows we ever found," Finstad said.

One of them was just lying on top of the ice, waiting to be found. Usually there's a little excavation involved, but the archaeologists simply picked this arrow up.

"It's very seldom to find them that well preserved on the ice. So it was kind of a gift. It was very beautiful," Finstad said.

Arrows are abundant in the glaciers because reindeer hunting was "almost like an industry" in the Iron and Medieval Ages, Finstad said.

People hunted for their own food, of course, but also to sell in a market.

Arrows can hold clues about past societies.

For example, some arrowheads found on the glaciers have tips made from river mussels that must have come from far away, cluing researchers in to just how far people were traveling and trading over the ages.

Some of the prehistoric arrows Finstad's team found last season were so well-preserved they still had fletching.

Fletching is delicate and doesn't usually last thousands of years. These were rare findings.

Some items they find are just "strange," Finstad said.

Small bits of wood, leather, and textile are often impossible to identify.

Finstad estimated they had found about 50 such mysterious, small objects at Lendbreen in 2024.

"It's all kind of small things, daily life things from the Viking Age or older, which you don't find in other archaeology contexts at least in Norway, because it's gone. It degrades," Finstad said.

Heavy snow cut off the archaeologists' efforts — but now they know where to look this summer.

"We are excited to go back," Finstad said.

• Steve Jobs tasked Jony Ive with designing a new computer to save Apple.
• Apple was struggling financially in 1997 and needed a hit product to regain profitability.
• The colorful iMac's design helped Apple sell 800,000 units in 1999.

After Steve Jobs returned to Apple in 1997, he looked to designer Jony Ive to help save it from going under.

The first time they met, the late cofounder asked Ive to create a network computer with internet connectivity "literally days" before the company was set to go bankrupt, Ive said on BBC's "Desert Island Discs" podcast.

At the time, Apple was struggling — it took a $150 million investment from rival Microsoft to help the company become profitable again. Apple needed a hit product, and Jobs enlisted a young Ive for the "impossible task." It was the world's first glimpse into Ive's vision for tech design.

"We started work from the first day that we met on what became the iMac," Ive said.

Personal computers didn't yet have a role in most people's lives back then, and many were intimidated by them, he said. Their mission, to focus on making a product "for people," became the philosophy that gave Apple an edge over competitors.

Ive put thought into each detail of the colorful lineup of PCs to make it more approachable for consumers. The handle, for example, was an intentional design choice to give the iMac a recognizable characteristic for those unfamiliar with the power of computing.

"It references immediately and unambiguously your hand, and you understand, therefore, something about this object," Ive said.

The iMac's appearance, like the handle and translucent colors, were better talking points than gigahertz and hard drive capacity, Ive said. The candy-colored PCs were the home run Apple needed. It sold 800,000 iMacs in the five months of its launch in 1999.

"It felt alive; it didn't static; it didn't feel stuck," Ive said.

It debuted with the tagline, "Collect all five."

The iMac has had some major revamps in the decades since it first debuted. Apple moved away from the colorful design in the mid-2000s in favor of minimalist grays and whites, but in 2021, it brought color back to its desktops.

After the success of the iMac, Ive went on to design more of Apple's most iconic products as his friendship with Jobs grew. He led design on the iPhone, iPad, and other products and eventually became the chief design officer. Ive announced his departure from Apple in 2019 after 27 years at the company.

• Shopify increased its acquihiring amid a hot market for AI talent.
• The company completed six small acquisitions last year to bolster its technical AI leadership.
• It also brought on an AI and machine learning veteran as its new chief technology officer.

Shopify has stepped up its acquihiring as the race for AI talent heats up.

CFO Jeff Hoffmeister said during the company's fourth-quarter earnings call earlier this month that Shopify had done six "tuck-in" acquisitions in the previous year.

He said that while the deals were small from a financial perspective, they've been an important source of talent and a tactic the company plans to continue.

"These have been very tactical, thoughtful AI hires and we want to continually be thoughtful, proactive, and judicious on thinking about the cash," he said.

Many of the founders that Shopify has hired now hold leadership positions in the company's product org. That includes Nicolas Grasset, the former CEO of AI-driven analytics startup Peel Insights. Shopify brought on the Peel team in May, and Grasset is now a director of product. Relay Commerce acquired the business itself.

Ray Reddy, cofounder and CEO of mobile ordering app Ritual, became a VP of product for retail at Shopify this January as part of an acquihire deal that also included his cofounder, Larry Stinson, and some engineering staff.

"I'm inspired by the opportunity to help local businesses adapt and thrive as generative AI reshapes customer expectations—a moment that reminds me of launching Ritual over a decade ago during the rise of mobile internet," Reddy wrote in a LinkedIn post about his joining Shopify. "I'm excited to join a team poised to help businesses of all sizes succeed as technology rapidly evolves."

Keeping up in a 'white-hot' market

Gil Luria, head of technology research at D.A. Davidson, said Shopify's increased acquihire activity is likely a product of the "white-hot" market for engineers with AI credibility.

"Hiring individuals is sometimes too slow or too expensive," Luria said. "Sometimes it's easier to just buy a small company that has AI engineers just for the talent."

Rousseau Kazi, former CEO of workplace communications platform Threads, joined Shopify's product org when Shopify acquihired the startup's team in June. Michael Averto, cofounder and former CEO of inventory operations platform ChannelApe, began working on inventory management as a product leader at Shopify as part of a deal in July.

Shopify also hired the team behind Stellate, a startup that made developer tools. Cofounder and former CEO Max Stoiber is now a director of engineering leading teams working on Liquid, Shopify's template language for storefronts. In September open-source developer group The Guild acquired Stellate's product and customer base.

Shopify also acquired Checkout Blocks, a checkout customization app, in June and hired Gil Greenberg as a product lead working on checkout extensibility. The Checkout Blocks app is still available for download in the Shopify App Store.

Luria said that Shopify's growth over the years has largely been organic and not from acquisitions. Shopify did invest billions into building its fulfillment network, acquiring Deliverr for more than $2 billion before selling it and the rest of its logistics business to Flexport. Shopify has since described its fulfillment work as a "side quest."

The past year is not the first time Shopify has used acquihires to bring on valuable talent. In 2018 it acquired the team behind Swedish shopping startup Tictail, and many of those leaders were key to the growth of its Shop app. It also acquired the B2B commerce marketplace Handshake in 2019, and those founders have gone on to hold product leadership roles at Shopify.

Shopify is also doubling down on AI talent in other ways. In August, the company hired Mikhail Parakhin as its new CTO. Parakhin led AI advancements like Copilot at Microsoft and also developed search engines and cloud services for more than four years as Yandex's CTO.

Hoffmeister also said during the earnings call that Shopify would continue to make strategic investments in startups building tech that its merchants would find valuable. Its 2024 investments included participation in a pre-seed round for Convergence, which is building an AI agent called Proxy.

Got a tip? Contact this reporter at [email protected], [email protected], or on the secure messaging app Signal at @mlstone.04.

• OpenAI, which is owned by a non-profit, wants to adopt a more traditional corporate structure.
• Elon Musk, Meta, charities, academics, and AI entrepreneurs have raised concerns about the plan.
• They question OpenAI's legal process, and whether its non-profit will be compensated fairly.

Sam Altman is attempting a thorny maneuver, transforming OpenAI from a subsidiary of a convoluted non-profit into a more conventional business.

Jungwon Byun knows what that's like.

In 2023, the organization that Byun cofounded, an AI lab named Ought, went through a similar transition. Launched in 2018, Ought built AI research tools, and was structured as a non-profit because its cofounders didn't expect AI to be commercially viable any time soon, Byun said in an interview. Then ChatGPT launched, AI mania took hold, and the leadership team realized their structure might be a hindrance to raising capital and pursuing their mission.

The decision was made to spin out Ought's core product, Elicit, as a for-profit company, along with most of its staff. Byun and several other executives slated to lead the independent Elicit recused themselves from discussions, and a firm specializing in asset valuations was hired to independently appraise the value of Elicit, so the remaining non-profit, Ought, could be paid appropriately. (Byun declined to share the exact price, though she said Elicit chose to pay a premium on top of the recommended price.)

OpenAI's planned transformation is on a far grander scale, but faces similar questions and potentially more gnarly challenges.

Altman wants to extricate OpenAI's revenue-generating business from its non-profit parent, creating a more traditional company that can take in investments and give stock to shareholders who expect big returns.

The process is complicated by OpenAI's complex corporate structure, the billions of dollars it has already raised from investors, and rival Elon Musk's attempts to block the deal.

It's not just Elon though. There's a growing chorus of critics, including entrepreneurs, other companies and charities, investors, academics, and activists, who say OpenAI may be about to make a grave mistake.

Byun is one of them.

"Artificial general intelligence is the most transformative technology of our lifetime and OpenAI is absolutely at the frontier and one of the most important players in that," she told BI. "So I think giving up governance rights to controlling the most important technology of our lifetime is an insanely huge decision and will affect all of humanity at a very great scale for a long time."

Her advice to OpenAI's charitable parent organization: Do not sell to anyone.

"I don't know, obviously, the details of what pressures they're under and what the details are of the options they're considering, and how it affects the mission," Byun said. "But from what I can see, I absolutely would not sell those governance rights or give them up." OpenAI didn't respond to requests for comment over the past week.

A convoluted structure

OpenAI was established as a non-profit in 2015. Over time, its need for capital to pay for AI development prompted it to establish a for-profit subsidiary to raise venture funding and pursue business partnerships and revenue-generating products. This (and various other subsidiaries) are controlled by the nonprofit, which is controlled by a board of directors chaired by Bret Taylor, alongside Altman, Fidji Simo, Larry Summers, and other business luminaries.

The board's main legal obligation is to further the non-profit's charitable mission, which is to build "safe and beneficial artificial general intelligence for the benefit of humanity," rather than delivering returns to shareholders.

OpenAI now seeks to transition to a more conventional corporate structure, turning the for-profit subsidiary into an independent public benefit company that controls "OpenAI's operations and business."

PBCs are relatively common. This approach takes into account the interests of shareholders, other stakeholders, and the public. With investors taken care of, OpenAI has said this will help the startup raise "necessary capital with conventional terms like others in this space."

Finding fair value

The remaining non-profit will receive shares in the public benefit company "at a fair valuation determined by independent financial advisors."

That may be the ultimate challenge — and one made more complex by potential conflicts of interest.

OpenAI investors and others focused on the startup's business-focused future may prefer to pay the non-profit less for its assets and control, leaving the new for-profit entity with more financial firepower. However, some of these people could be in positions to influence the valuation and decision-making process.

Elon Musk, an OpenAI cofounder who acrimoniously split from Altman, has sued the startup over its plans. Musk and a group of other investors also made a bid in February to acquire the nonprofit parent OpenAI Inc. for $97.4 billion. That was more than half of the total value of the entire startup, based on its most-recent funding round.

"It is in the public's interest to ensure that OpenAI, Inc. is compensated at fair market value," the Musk consortium said in a statement. "That value cannot be determined by insiders negotiating on both sides of the same table."

OpenAI's board has an obligation to make sure the nonprofit is getting a fair value for giving up its assets and control, according to Ellen Aprill, an expert on charities at the UCLA School of Law.

"One of the very big issues is what is fair market value?" she told BI. "In particular, how much should the nonprofit get for giving up control?

"Part of what Musk and his group were trying to do with this offer is to set at least some floor, some sense of what the fair market value would be," she added. "Putting it out for auction — let's see what people would pay."

Should Altman recuse himself?

Taylor, the OpenAI board chairman, officially rebuffed Musk. "OpenAI is not for sale, and the board has unanimously rejected Mr. Musk's latest attempt to disrupt his competition," Taylor wrote in a statement. "Any potential reorganization of OpenAI will strengthen our nonprofit and its mission to ensure AGI benefits all of humanity."

But days before that, Altman publicly shot the bid down with a post on X that mocked the struggles of the Musk-owned social network: "no thank you but we will buy twitter for $9.74 billion if you want."

Altman's post prompted some discussion of whether he was, or should be, recused from this process.

"When it comes to looking at a conflicted transaction like this one, it's much easier to satisfy the court's review if you take people who are on both sides of their transaction out of the negotiations," said Peter Molk, a law professor at the University of Florida.

However, he noted that under Delaware law, Altman isn't legally required to remove himself. Molk also cautioned against recusing too early.

"There's value in his being there. Along the way, he can provide useful insight and information that's actually useful for OpenAI, for the nonprofit, if they're going to go ahead with that process," Molk explained. "You want to try and strike a balance that allows them to do their job, that helps a transaction occur in a way that's actually beneficial to all parties, but then have them take themselves out of the picture once you're beyond that point."

Meta and others pile on

The existing for-profit parts of OpenAI have already raised billions of dollars in pursuit of "Artificial General Intelligence," or AGI, which the startup defines as systems that outperform humans at most economically valuable work. This has raised hackles among some consumer advocates.

Public Citizen, a consumer watchdog, has repeatedly assailed the AI startup, accusing it of betraying its nonprofit mission. "The nonprofit board has behaved as a subordinate to the for-profit, and has done nothing that evidences any commitment to the nonprofit mission," said Robert Weissman, the co-president of Public Citizen.

The solution is to forcibly dissolve the nonprofit and auction off its assets for the benefit of a new independent charity not linked to the current OpenAI board, he added.

Facebook parent company Meta raised similar concerns, writing to the California Attorney General Rob Bonta in December to ask him to step in.

"Taking advantage of this non-profit status, OpenAI raised billions of dollars in capital from investors to further its purported mission," the company wrote. "Now, OpenAI wants to change its status while retaining all of the benefits that enabled it to reach the point it has today. That is wrong. OpenAI should not be allowed to flout the law by taking and reappropriating assets it built as a charity and using them for potentially enormous private gains."

In late January, a group of 25 charities, including one started by eBay founder Pierre Omidyar and his wife, piled on.

The coalition wrote to the California AG, urging him "to take prompt legal action to ensure that OpenAI's assets are not illegally diverted for private gain."

Dubious legal justifications

Rose Chan-Loui, a law professor at UCLA specializing in non-profit and philanthropy law, is dubious of the legal justifications for OpenAI's plan.

She said the proposed changes would amount to a change in purpose for OpenAI's current non-profit. To do that under Delaware law, requires one of four criteria to be met:

• Is the charity's original purpose now illegal to fulfill?
• Has the mission become impossible to fulfill?
• Is it now impracticable to fulfill?
• Or too wasteful to fulfill.

"We don't think any of those apply here," Chan-Loui said. "We keep going back to — your purpose is not to be first in the race to AGI. Your purpose is to make sure that AGI is to protect, and ensure safe development of AGI."

The lesson of other nonprofits

OpenAI's existing structure — a non-profit that controls a for-profit subsidiary — is unusual, but by no means unheard of.

The Mozilla Foundation, for example, owns a tech company, Mozilla Corporation, that produces the Firefox internet browser. "Non-profit organizations can not only coexist with commercial enterprises but also challenge them to do better," a Mozilla spokesperson said in a statement. "Non-profit commitments provide the kind of public interest compass we don't see enough of in tech."

Another parallel comes from the healthcare sector. In the 1990s, in the face of mounting financial pressure, the Blue Cross Blue Shield Association allowed its affiliated nonprofit plan organizations to transition to for-profit businesses. Many subsequently did so, to the chagrin of some.

"The mission of the non-profit in most Blue Cross Blue Shield plans was to provide affordable, accessible health care to people," a Consumers Union attorney told NPR in 2010. "And now the mission is to make money for stockholders."

The most substantial threat to OpenAI's plans though, might not be Elon Musk or other critics. The California and Delaware Attorneys General are both making inquiries into the specifics of the transition.

"The current beneficiaries of OpenAI have an interest in ensuring that charitable assets are not transferred to private interests without due consideration," Delaware AG Kathleen Jennings wrote.

AGs have meaningful legal powers to get involved. In 2002, Pennsylvania's Attorney General intervened in a planned deal by the non-profit foundation that controls the for-profit Hershey chocolate brand to sell its assets to Wrigley for $12 billion, citing the potential harm to the town of Hershey.

The sale was ultimately called off.

• Living in the US has boosted my self-confidence, but I'm ready to move to another country.
• I grew up in the UK and find Europe's work-life balance is significantly better than the US's.
• I try to keep a healthy work-life balance in the US, but it's a constant battle.

I'm from London and moved to the US 20 years ago. While I'm thankful for the doors that opened after moving to the US, I've never fully adjusted to American work life and culture.

The only benefit to working in the US is the salary

The work culture here, especially on the East Coast where I live, is borderline unhealthy compared with Europe and the many other countries I've traveled to for my career in hospitality marketing and travel journalism.

Work doesn't consume people in some European countries the way it does in the US.

Knowing this makes it difficult for me to return to the US every time I'm away. In fact, the only benefit of living in the US, for me, is the salaries.

The median annual salary for employees in the UK is around $30K to $40k, while in the US, I've been making between $50k to $85k in various industries.

With the high cost of living on the East Coast, it's helpful to have a little extra cash to enjoy daily luxuries such as dinner with friends and family and travel.

The money comes at a high price, though.

I try to enforce a healthy work-life balance, but it's a constant battle

Sometimes it feels like my work takes precedence over everything else in my life.

For example, I once had to stay behind at work until about 7 p.m. for a back-to-school night and had to cancel my plans in the city.

To keep myself sane, my general rule is no email responses before 8:30 a.m. or after 5:30 p.m. Working hours in the UK are the same, but there's an understanding of never taking work home.

Waking up to several emails sent in the middle of the night is not something I ever anticipated when working here.

I've worked in teaching, marketing, travel, and law, and it's all been the same in my experience — dozens of emails being sent out of work hours, which leaves me overwhelmed the next morning.

In the past, colleagues have even texted me while I've been out because I didn't respond to an email in the evening right away.

I try to take leisurely lunches and often end up eating alone

Oftentimes, I feel like the work-life-balance cheerleader in the office.

My coworkers seem in awe when I tell them I'm taking my full lunch hour to go on a walk or sit at a café.

Of course, I always extend an invite or usher them to do the same, but there's always "more that needs doing."

I try to get out as much as possible, but if it's raining I'm often left eating alone, which feels pretty lonely.

I've been in jobs for years and still felt like I never really knew my coworkers.

My parents worked in the UK for more than 30 years and always shared how breaks were about 1.5 to two hours and often included a pub trip with coworkers.

When I travel back home, I see what they mean. The busiest times in the city are during work hours when nine-to-fivers flock to the local watering holes for a chance to get out of the office.

Living in the US has given me confidence, but I hope to move to another country in the future

As a Brit, I love the way Americans make everything feel exciting — their outgoing nature is almost infectious.

Living here boosted my confidence and belief that I could achieve anything.

But it feels almost impossible at times to find genuine connections.

I live in Boston — my favorite US city with its green spaces, cobblestone streets, history, and ocean views — but people rarely talk to each other on the streets.

In fact, it's so rare that when people eventually do make conversation, I'm almost caught off guard.

I yearn for simplicity and true connections. I'd love to move outside the US in the future. Looking at quality of life, culture, and retirement abroad, I see so many benefits to moving away.

In the meantime, I'll continue to be the cheerleader in my workplace in hopes of showing others there are more important things in life than just work.

When I heard that coffee futures were reaching record highs, I got a bad case of the jitters. What would happen to my morning cup of Joe? How expensive could it get? Could I afford enough coffee to get me through the day?

I set out on a mission to find out.

Caffeine is the world's most popular drug, and coffee is the second-most-traded commodity after oil. On the futures market, traders buy coffee shipments months or years in advance — so price spikes can indicate what the rest of us might be paying down the road. After the pandemic began, prices for coffee futures rose, along with everything else. Accordingly, the consumer price index showed a steep increase in prices for store-bought coffee throughout 2022.

The problems didn't stop there. Thanks to severe droughts in 2023, major harvests in Brazil and Vietnam did badly, and water in the Panama Canal ran low, slowing ship traffic. Coffee futures started to tick up. Then, this past November, the commodity skyrocketed. Brazil, which exports the lion's share of the industry's preferred arabica beans, was beginning its growing season as the country's worst drought on record stretched into a second year. The clouds that usually shade coffee trees went missing. It would be the second bad harvest in a row. When the news hit, traders rushed to lock in arabica contracts, sending prices to all-time highs in December. Now prices are more than double their 2023 peak. Robusta beans, often used in instant coffee, hit their own record high this month.

Is this the end of coffee as we know it?

Climate experts say the underlying supply problems aren't going anywhere. Over the next two decades, bad harvests could become the norm, wild arabica coffee could move from thriving to endangered, and the land available for coffee cultivation is expected to shrink by half or more. While the coffee market has some flexibility to keep prices down, the long-term outlook for America's favorite beverage is bleak.

Coffee prices have already been going up for a few years. This past summer, brands like Folgers and Maxwell House raised their prices to pass on previous commodity increases to customers. Prices at my local café went up $0.35, so I started grinding my coffee at home. But, the addict that I am, I kept caffeinating. We all did.

This "inelastic demand" gives companies plenty of wiggle room to raise prices without worrying that people will stop buying coffee entirely. Both Folgers' parent company, J.M. Smucker, and Maxwell's parent company, Nestlé, reported higher coffee sales in the US last year despite raising consumer prices. But how much higher could prices get?

People who brew their coffee at home "are going to feel it," Jay Zagorsky, a professor at Boston University's Questrom School of Business, said. Since coffee beans are the only ingredient in a tub of Folgers, commodity price increases have a direct impact on grocery prices. Two decades ago, US Department of Agriculture economists looked at how commodity coffee price swings affected grocery shelves. They found that every $0.10 increase in futures led to an immediate $0.02 increase in prices for canisters of ground coffee. When commodity prices stayed high, the rest of the increase was passed on over the course of a year. According to consumer price index data from January, grocery coffee prices are already more than 3% higher than they were this time last year — instant coffee alone rose 7%. And Illy recently told Bloomberg that a 25% hike in prices in the next few months was not out of the question.

To counteract low supply, coffee retailers can fudge the quality: Robusta beans, which have a harsher flavor than arabica, can be mixed into blends, for example. Smucker recently told investors that for Folgers and its other coffee brands, the company had "the ability to flex formulas and still deliver the exact same consumer experience." In Indonesia, coffee shops are even mixing corn and rice with their coffee beans to stretch supplies. Some people have called this phenomenon of companies swapping in cheaper and lower-quality ingredients "flavorflation."

In cafés, Zagorsky said, commodity price swings have a less noticeable impact because most of the cost of a latte is not beans but labor. "If I was Starbucks, I'd worry much more about the unionization drive," he said. Massive companies such as Starbucks can manage the uncertainty around commodity prices by locking in multiyear contracts, playing the market, and hedging their bets. Last year, Starbucks actually came out ahead on coffee futures. The company expects that it has enough beans in storage or contracted to last through at least September. In December, its CEO said it would not raise its North American store menu prices before then — though it is removing some discounts.

Small roasters buy quality beans for more than the commodity price, but unlike Starbucks, they are more sensitive to price swings. Over an Americano (her) and an afternoon decaf (me), Daria Whalen, a coffee buyer for Ritual Coffee in San Francisco, admitted she's worried.

She opened a 12-ounce bag of coffee and poured a handful of beans onto the table. She pointed out slight variations in their size, explaining that these beans came from five different farms in a family co-op that pays coffee pickers Colombia's minimum wage. In an industry rife with shady labor practices, from child labor to human trafficking, buying from farms that pay decent wages is "one of the only things we have left," Whalen said.

This bag retails for $25, more than five times the price of Folgers at Costco. It's not clear how much more consumers would be willing to pay. Thankfully, the more flexible part of that price is the flavor: Coffee beans are rated on a point scale, like wine. To adapt to a temporary price spike, Whalen said, she will choose beans that taste good but fall lower on that scale.

The big question for Whalen is what happens when the climate crisis makes these supply shocks more frequent. "I have anxiety, like probably 85% of the population," Whalen said. "So on some days, you catch me at cup four of coffee and I'm like, 'There's not going to be any coffee anymore.'"

The climate crisis is already changing coffee growing. The past two years have been the hottest on record, bringing more evaporation and making droughts more severe. Coffee harvests have suffered. "In the last year, I saw scorched coffee beans. Coffee beans that were shriveled because of extreme heat," Whalen said. She has also seen warmer temperatures nurture a disease called coffee leaf rust, push back growing seasons, and affect shipping logistics.

A 2022 data synthesis projected double-digit losses over the next few decades in the land that's good for cultivating coffee beans. Some areas will become newly available for coffee, but that won't be nearly enough to balance the losses. Unfortunately for connoisseurs, that new land will likely work best for robusta beans, not arabica beans.

In response to the changes, more growers are drying beans rather than washing them to save on water. That changes flavor profiles, favoring fruity flavors like blueberries, Whalen said: "Sometimes you can get a ferment-y flavor that we would call a defect, but a lot of people really love that."

There's some adapting that farms and supply chains can do, but these efforts may still fall short if countries don't aggressively limit their fossil fuel emissions. One study found that under a business-as-usual scenario, even with best practices in place for coffee growing and logistics, Starbucks could see persistent bean shortages as early as 2029. In its most recent annual report, Starbucks acknowledged that the climate crisis could materially influence its financial performance, particularly if it meant the company couldn't meet demand.

"If you care about your coffee," Regina Rodrigues Rodrigues, a Brazilian climate scientist, said, "you can't support any policies that allow the continued burning of fossil fuels. That's the thing."

Environmental concerns also popped up the last time coffee futures spiked, back in 1977. One environmentalist called the price increase "merely another way of telling us that the 4 billion souls on this planet must compete for a steadily shrinking supply of farm produce." That prediction turned out to be wrong. Since the 1960s, agricultural production has grown every decade. In fact, so much new land has been used for coffee that prices haven't even kept pace with overall inflation — Zagorsky pointed out that, adjusted for inflation, 1 pound of coffee today is still cheaper than 1 pound in 1980.

Looking back, it's tempting to hope that the world is crying wolf, but adaptive measures came with downsides. Agriculture boomed thanks to the clearing of forests and an unprecedented application of fossil fuels, both in fertilizers and as fuel for transporting food along vast global supply chains. One study estimated that most of the growth in agricultural production since the 1970s has not been in line with safe environmental practices. Now, as the world warms, agricultural growth is starting to slow, even as demand for coffee continues to rise. We have not solved our coffee problems; we have merely postponed them.

Is sad, watery 1950s diner coffee our fate? Or will we find new ways to make coffee growing productive and resilient? Zagorsky said that the futures market predicts a price decrease. But beyond that, he doesn't want to make any predictions. "Economists are terrible at guessing the future," he said.

So I took my fears and uncertainty to someone willing to predict the future: Dr. Honeybrew, a coffee fortune teller in Manhattan's East Village. Honeybrew took a look at the coffee dregs in my tiny espresso cup to read the future of coffee itself.

"Everyone is plunging a straw down in the ground and just sucking up all of the richness, all of the life, all of the power from the soil," he said. "This is Mother Nature's way of saying, 'You know what? In return, I'm going to give you guys the shittiest beans.'"

Honeybrew foresaw the sting of change. The chaos of revolution. And a shared love of coffee that, against all odds, could bring Americans back together. Really, he said, coffee's future hinges on the leadership of Melania Trump: "If the Trump family brings to the White House a cocker spaniel," Honeybrew said, "it will be a very good omen."

What Honeybrew didn't speculate on is the future-shaping potential of the Trump administration's recent activity: how new tariffs might increase coffee prices, whether cuts at the National Weather Service could make it harder to predict harvests, and how leaving the Paris agreement could make the underlying problems worse. Without a major course correction, even a cocker spaniel in the Oval Office probably won't save coffee.

Meg Duff is a reporter covering climate change and the environment.

• Shawna Lum, 31, knew the American obsession with climbing the career ladder wasn't for her.
• In 2016, Lum moved to Spain to escape the rat race and carve out her own path.
• In Spain, she is happier, spends less money on housing, and has started her own business.

This as-told-to essay is based on a conversation with Shawna Lum, a 31-year-old from Los Angeles who moved to Spain in 2016. She founded Move Overseas Now, a company that helps people move to Europe and Latin America. The conversation has been edited for length and clarity.

I'm originally from Los Angeles but went to Washington State University. In 2015, I moved to Spain for a semester to study abroad, and that experience completely changed me.

During my six months in Spain, I fell in love with Europe. The ability to travel so easily — like catching a round-trip flight from Bilbao, the city in northern Spain where I was living, to Amsterdam for just $80 or London for $100 — was incredible.

On top of that, the community and my social life were amazing. Going out for tapas, enjoying a glass of wine, and having a meal was so affordable compared to the US. I also loved the walking culture; there's no need for a car. That's something I never realized I was missing until I lived there.

After my studies in Spain, I returned to the US and worked in corporate jobs for about a year and a half, first in Texas, then in Chicago and Louisiana. Throughout that time, I couldn't shake the memory of my time in Spain.

The typical American dream wasn't resonating with me — the "checklist" of getting a corporate job, saving for a house, and getting married. I asked myself, "Why must I follow this path?"

I moved to Europe and came to terms with some downsides of American life

At the end of 2016, I moved to Spain and have been living here ever since.

When I first moved here, visa options were limited. There are many more now, like digital nomad visas and passive income visas for retirees. Back then, a student visa was my best option.

Although I didn't want to go back to school, I decided to pursue a master's in entrepreneurship and innovation in Barcelona. After completing my degree, I kept renewing my visa.

Along the way, I started doing side hustles and diving into digital marketing. I eventually realized I didn't have to work for others and launched a web design agency.

In 2021, my dad was diagnosed with Stage 4 lung cancer, so I returned to Los Angeles to take care of him. He passed away shortly after.

While grieving, I also became frustrated about life in the US. Coming back to the States was a tough adjustment. I started noticing the toxic culture — people seemed unhappy with their lives, and many of my high school friends were on antidepressants. It also felt like everything revolved around money, even healthcare.

I missed the sense of connection and community I had experienced In Spain. Living overseas showed me that life could be different — the stress levels and the divide between work and home were much more balanced.

I felt like many people could resonate with my reasoning. So, when I returned to Spain, I started Move Overseas Now, a business that helps others make their moves.

I help other people move abroad

As a relocation coach, I help people move permanently to Europe and Latin America through online master classes that outline the steps.

Most people who sign up for my courses are 35 and older with established careers, freelancing or working on a 1099.

Affordability is a huge reason my clients move abroad, especially retirees on fixed incomes. Many of them find that in countries like Spain, Portugal, Italy, France, the Netherlands, Mexico, Costa Rica, Colombia, and Panama, they can live comfortably on their Social Security check — something that isn't possible for them in the US.

In Spain, you can rent a nice one-bedroom in a midsize city for about $650 to $980 a month or under $1,300 in the major cities. In Panama, some of my clients live in beautiful condos just steps from the sea with two balconies and air conditioning in an expat-friendly community for around $900 a month. Private healthcare is also a game changer: Many clients pay just $80 to $200 a month for coverage, with no copays or deductibles.

By spending less on housing, healthcare, and daily expenses, they experience more freedom, less stress, and a better quality of life — things they feel are out of reach in the US.

I don't see myself ever living in the US again

I feel like my life has improved living abroad.

I always felt different in the US, like I didn't fit in. Everything has fallen into place in Europe. I married my husband, who has permanent residency in Spain. Through him, I was granted a partnership visa, also known as a family reunification visa.

During COVID, we lived in a friend's guest house in France for about five months. We also spent six months as digital nomads in Asia, living in Thailand, Nepal, and mostly India. Overall, it was an incredible journey.

Right now, we're renting a one-bedroom, one-bathroom duplex just outside Barcelona's city center for 300 euros, or about $314, a month. We got a great deal because we know the landlord. We're planning to buy a home eventually, so for now, we're focused on saving up for that.

Living abroad makes me feel freer. The weather, the greenery, and the greater safety as a woman are all amazing. I also feel better spiritually because interactions feel less competitive and transactional. It's really allowed me to slow down and give myself more grace.

I don't see myself returning to the US — at least not willingly unless it's for an event, like a funeral, or to take care of something serious for a couple of weeks.