• President Trump has proposed that the US government get a stake in TikTok as part of a sale.
• But can the government actually own a piece of TikTok?
• Legal analysts said it could spark free-speech issues that would make the app hard to run.

TikTok needs to find a new owner for its US app to comply with a divest-or-ban law. Could it be the government?

Since taking office, President Donald Trump has repeatedly proposed that the government get some type of stake in TikTok.

"What I'm thinking about saying to somebody is buy it and give half to the United States," he said during a January 21 press conference.

In its bid to buy TikTok, AI company Perplexity AI answered Trump's call. This week, the company updated its proposal to merge TikTok's US business with its own by offering the US government half of the new entity. That's on the condition that it goes public at a valuation of at least $300 billion, a source familiar with the offer told Business Insider.

But what would happen to TikTok if the US government owns part of it? Is there a precedent for this?

While the government has controlling shares in other companies, such as Amtrak, owning a piece of a major social app would be new territory.

"It's a social-media company that has a significant platform demonstrably for political reach and communication," said Aram Gavoor, associate dean at the George Washington University Law School who focuses on issues in tech, regulation, and national security. The ownership would bring about "novel constitutional questions with regard to speech," he said.

For a TikTok sale involving the government to work, the dealmakers would need to set up editorial guardrails to prevent the US from encroaching on its users' First Amendment rights. Even then, legal analysts told BI that TikTok's content moderation, such as removing videos that violate its policies, could create an avalanche of legal challenges from the app's users.

"What would be necessary, though I'm not sure it would be sufficient, is an extremely strict separation between the government and this new TikTok entity, especially when it comes to anything editorial," said Alan Rozenshtein, an associate professor at the University of Minnesota Law School who previously served as an advisor at the Justice Department.

Let's walk through some of the big questions around a TikTok deal.

Can the government legally own TikTok?

If the government grabs a stake in TikTok, it wouldn't be the first time it's done so in a company in a moment of flux.

During the Great Recession, the government was deeply involved in various businesses, bailing out automakers and banks and taking a controlling stake in AIG, for example.

It also owns consumer-facing institutions like the US Postal Service and Amtrak.

There is some precedent for the government's financial involvement in media companies, too. The government funds the broadcasting network Voice of America, and Congress partially funds NPR and PBS through appropriations to the Corporation for Public Broadcasting.

Each of those organizations has strict guidelines to protect editorial independence, however. NPR's ethics handbook says that its journalists have "full and final authority over all journalistic decisions." PBS said its content "must be free of undue influence from third-party funders, political interests, and other outside forces." And Voice of America has a firewall that "prohibits interference by any U.S. government official in the objective, independent reporting of news."

A version of TikTok partially owned by the government would likely need to establish similar editorial barriers as its media counterparts and provide assurances of independence.

Even if a TikTok deal establishes a government firewall, it might not hold up in court

Even if TikTok sets up contract language to keep the government out of its editorial work, it may not matter in the courts. Other government-owned entities that have attempted to define themselves as independent have faced First Amendment lawsuits and lost.

In 1994, Amtrak was sued after it tried to block a billboard from displaying political content in one of its stations. The Supreme Court ruled that the company, as a government entity, had violated the First Amendment rights of the billboard's creator.

The Supreme Court said that Amtrak, by virtue of being federally owned and controlled, "was subject to First Amendment restrictions in the same way as any other federal actor," said Jennifer Safstrom, a law professor at Vanderbilt University Law School who directs its First Amendment clinic.

In its opinion on the case, the court wrote that even though Congress attempted to establish Amtrak as independent from the US government, "it is not for Congress to make the final determination of Amtrak's status as a Government entity for purposes of determining the constitutional rights of citizens affected by its actions."

The case establishes that the government's self-characterization of how it owns a company may not stand on its own. "Courts will look beyond formal language to assess the extent of the government's entanglement," Safstrom said.

Would a government-owned TikTok be allowed to block porn and hate speech?

Many social apps block pornography and hate speech (and a ton of other stuff like content promoting eating disorders) as part of their community guidelines. But those types of expression are generally protected under the First Amendment, and a government-owned TikTok may face a flurry of legal challenges if it removes videos.

These are "uncharted waters," Safstrom said. "It's hard to know how expansive that world of litigation could be given the volume of users on that platform."

If TikTok continually gets challenged for pulling down hate speech and other unsavory content and stops a lot of its moderation work, it would be "essentially unusable and certainly very unprofitable," Rozenshtein said.

Who would control the TikTok algorithm?

The First Amendment protects the speech of TikTok users. But what about TikTok's algorithm? If the US government owns a part of TikTok, can it limit what users see?

That question remains up in the air, as algorithm decisions may qualify as "government speech," legal analysts said.

"If the government has a platform, it's not obligated to promote every person's particular point of view," Rozenshtein said. The government often makes choices as to what content it shares or doesn't share, such as last year when the State Department worked with the private sector to promote a set of music artists internationally as part of a diplomacy initiative.

He said the postal service offers a possible comparison for understanding why the government may have more discretion over the TikTok algorithm versus users' videos. The post office gets to decide what art it features on stamps, but it doesn't have the authority to limit most of what people write in the letters they send in the mail.

Ultimately, there are many unknowns as to what will happen around a TikTok sale, if ByteDance opts to sell it at all. Earlier this month, TikTok's lawyer said divesting its US app from its parent company would be "extraordinarily difficult" over any timeline.

And, of course, the Chinese government could block a ByteDance deal.

Asked on January 21 about a TikTok sale, China's Foreign Ministry spokesperson seemed open to letting a deal be "independently decided," though he added that "China's law and regulations should be observed."

Representatives for the White House, TikTok, and ByteDance did not respond to requests for comment.

• "Severance," an office thriller show, is partially filmed at a real office in suburban New Jersey.
• The office, Bell Works, was originally Bell Labs, a historic incubator for telephone technology.
• Today, the building is a mixed-use development with office space, stores, and restaurants.

Lumon Industries — the fictional employer at the center of the workplace thriller "Severance" — is probably not anyone's ideal employer.

In the Apple TV+ series, Lumon is a cult-like biotechnology company that employs, in part, "severed" workers. These employees undergo a procedure that separates their consciousness into two parts: an "outie" who goes about life on the outside, and an "innie" who toils away in the basement on mysterious tasks. As a result, their restrictive workspace is the only world that they've ever known.

Workers at the 60-year-old office complex where parts of the show are filmed, however, have the option to order caviar service and mezcal negronis at its on-site restaurant and bar.

Bell Works in Holmdel, New Jersey, a township about 30 miles south of Newark, was once a hub of technological innovation. Formerly Bell Laboratories, the 2-million-square-foot building was designed by famed architect Eero Saarinen for a division of AT&T and opened in 1962.

At first, it was where scientists researched and developed technologies for phones and other devices. In 2015, though, it was transformed into a walkable complex of modernized office space plus restaurants, bars, shops, and more.

While Bell Works may still look huge and monolithic from the outside, its interior is more bustling and alive than the sterile and mundane aesthetic of the show suggests.

Here are four facts about the office building used as a filming location for "Severance."

1. Only parts of Lumon's office are filmed at Bell Works

"Severance" features Bell Works' exterior and entrance, as well as its actual parking lot.

Its central, iconic skylit atrium also appears in a few scenes.

The rest of the show was filmed in New York on several sound stages, according to Curbed.

Production designer Jeremy Hindle built the interior of the office from the ground up — from the narrow hallways throughout to the iconic green carpet.

"Green is the most common color to your eye, like that's the theory that it's calming, it makes you feel calm," Hindle told Variety in 2022. "Some of the colors, the theories were kind of who they are as characters and what they needed to survive. I think green is something you need to survive."

2. The original Bell Labs building was a tech incubator

While nobody in the show knows what Lumon Industries' severed employees really do, we have records of what developments have emerged from work in the Bell Labs building.

From 1962 to 2007, the Bell Labs building had over 6,000 employees — including a few Nobel Prize winners — who were responsible for many technological innovations.

The theory for the laser, as well as the Big Bang Theory, originated in the Bell Labs building. It's also the location of the receiving end of the first cellphone call.

Bell Labs is now a mixed-use development called Bell Works

Inside, the current Bell Works building is nothing like the office in "Severance." It's also much changed from its original look, thanks to some recent renovations.

A New Jersey-based firm, Somerset Development, purchased the building in 2013 for $27 million with plans to modernize the outdated and unused office building.

"The greatest experiment is yet to come for these walls, and that is the ability of a community to come together," Somerset Development president Ralph Zucker told NJ.com in 2013. "This building will be repurposed as a place for living."

Somerset renamed it Bell Works, which is now a mixed-use building with office space, retail, and dining. It also hosts conferences and events.

More than 70 vendors have set up shop in Bell Works, including local eateries, a bar, an indoor golf simulator, and a basketball court for tenants that is sometimes open to the public. There's also fitness franchise F45 and ice cream shop Jersey Freeze.

Tenant companies include local utility Jersey Central Power & Light, HR recruiting software iCIMS, and major insurer Guardian Life.

Bell Works' website calls it a "Metroburb," which it defines as "a little metropolis in suburbia."

The show spent almost 5 times as much money filming the second season in New Jersey

The budget for the second season of "Severance" is nothing to sniff at.

According to NJ.com, during its first season, the show spent $5.1 million filming in New Jersey. The second season eclipsed that number by a lot after spending more than $24 million over three years filming in New Jersey.

Kings Landing, a condominium complex in Middletown, New Jersey, was another filming location, and part of Palisades Interstate Park in Alpine, New Jersey, which overlooks the Hudson River, was also used.

Further north, Phoenicia Diner in the Catskills was used to film scenes at Pip's Bar & Grille.

Palmer Haasch contributed reporting to this story.

• A series of companies have rolled back DEI initiatives amid pressure from conservative groups and the White House.
• Some CEOs have voiced their support or defended the diversity programs at their companies.
• Deutsche Bank's CEO is the latest bank executive to defend DEI efforts.

The list of CEOs who are publicly backing their company's DEI policies is growing.

Deutsche Bank CEO Christian Sewing is the latest, joining JPMorgan's Jaime Dimon and Goldman Sachs' David Solomon in publicly defending DEI programs amid wider external criticism of diversity initiatives from conservative activists and President Trump's new administration.

One of Trump's first executive orders placed federal DEI staffers on administrative leave while work began to dismantle their departments.

The pull-back on DEI in the private sector began before Trump took office. A slew of companies — including Meta, Walmart, and McDonald's — either reduced or ended their own DEI initiatives. Some had been targeted by conservative activist groups.

However, amid the tensions around DEI, some executives are taking a public stance in support of their firm's policies.

Deutsche Bank

Christian Sewing, the CEO of Deutsche Bank, said the company is "firmly behind" its existing DEI programs, calling them "integral" to its strategy in a Frankfurt press conference on Thursday.

"Quite honestly, I know what diversity has brought us on the management board at the top reporting level," Sewing said. "That's why we are strong supporters of these programs."

If the legality of DEI programs should ever change, the bank might reevaluate its stance, he added.

"But in terms of our basic attitude, in terms of our mindset, both issues — whether it's diversity policy, inclusion or sustainability — are an integral part of Deutsche Bank's strategy," he said.

JPMorgan

Jamie Dimon, the CEO of JPMorgan, was defiant in the face of apparent targeting from activist shareholders over the company's DEI programs.

"Bring them on," he told CNBC on January 22. "We are going to continue to reach out to the Black community, the Hispanic community, the LGBT community, the veterans community."

Goldman Sachs

David Solomon, the CEO of Goldman Sachs, said that while he'd heard of shareholder proposals, he hadn't yet reviewed them.

"We're advising our clients to think about these things," Solomon said in a separate interview with CNBC on January 22. "They think about decarbonization, they think about climate transition. They think about their businesses, how they find talent, the diversity of the talent they find all over the world."

Goldman Sachs's stated inclusion goals are geared towards funneling more women into leadership positions, making "progress towards racial equity," and ensuring diversity both among its vendors and in its boardroom.

Cisco

Chuck Robbins, the CEO of Cisco, said that a diverse workforce being better was an inarguable "fact" in an interview with Axios on January 22.

"I think the pendulum swings a little wide in both directions," Robbins said. "And for us, it's about finding the equilibrium ... You cannot argue with the fact that a diverse workforce is better."

Robbins added that DEI is being discussed as "single issue," when he believes it's far more complex.

"And in reality, it's made up of 150 different things, and maybe seven of them got a little out of hand," he said. "I think those six or seven things are going to get solved and then you're going to be left with common sense."

Costco

Costco has been clear about its ongoing support for DEI, even as it faces mounting pressure from conservative groups to walk back its policies.

Nearly all of Costco's shareholders rejected a proposal by the National Center for Public Policy Research last week, similar to the one received by JPMorgan. It would have required Costco to issue a report on the legal and financial risks of DEI policies.

"The overwhelming support of our shareholders' vote really puts an answer to that question," said CEO Ron Vachris.

Costco's board has also previously issued statements reaffirming the company's dedication to DEI.

"Our commitment to an enterprise rooted in respect and inclusion is appropriate and necessary," the board wrote in December.

The company continues to face scrutiny for its policies, as 19 Republican attorneys general sent a letter to Vachris, urging him to put an end to what they call "divisive and discriminatory DEI practices."

• Cloud and inference providers see rising demand for Nvidia H200 chips due to DeepSeek's AI models.
• DeepSeek's open-source models require powerful hardware to run the full model for inference.
• The trend runs counter to the Nvidia sell-off following growing awareness of DeepSeek.

Some cloud providers are experiencing a notable uptick in demand for Nvidia's H200 chips after Chinese AI company DeepSeek burst into the race for the winning foundation model this month.

Though the stock market caught wind of the powerful yet efficient large language model Monday, sending Nvidia's stock down 16%, DeepSeek, has been on the radar of AI researchers and developers since it released its first model, V2, in May 2024.

But the performance of V3, released in December, is what made AI developers sit up and take notice. When R1, the company's reasoning model, which competes with OpenAI's o1, was released in early January, demand for Nvidia's H200s started climbing.

"The launch of DeepSeek R1 has significantly accelerated demand for H200. We've seen such strong interest that enterprises are pre-purchasing large blocks of Lambda's H200 capacity, even before public availability," said Robert Brooks, founding team member and vice president of revenue at cloud provider Lambda.

DeepSeek's models are open source, which means users pay very little to use them. However, they still need hardware, or a cloud computing service to use them at scale.

Business Insider spoke with 10 cloud service and AI inference providers. Five reported a rapid increase in demand for Nvidia's H200 graphics processing units this month.

Amazon Web Services and Coreweave declined to comment. Oracle, Google, and Microsoft did not respond to requests for comment.

This week, AWS, Microsoft, Google, and Nvidia have made DeepSeek models available on their various cloud and AI-developer platforms, or provided instructions for users to do so themselves.

Nvidia declined to comment, citing a quiet period before its February 26 earnings release.

AI cloud offerings have exploded in the last two years, creating a slew of options beyond the mainstays of cloud computing like Microsoft Azure, and Amazon Web Services.

The demand has come from a range of customers from startups and individual researchers to massive multinational firms.

"We've heard from half a dozen of the 50 largest companies in the world. I'm really not exaggerating," Tuhin Srivastava, cofounder of inference provider Baseten, told BI.

Friday, semiconductor industry analysts at Seminanalysis reported "tangible effects" on pricing for H100 and H200 capacity in the market stemming from DeepSeek.

Total sales of Nvidia H200 GPUs have reached the "double digits billions, CFO Colette Kress said on the company's November earnings call.

'Exponential demand' for Nvidia H200s

Karl Mozurkewich and his team at cloud provider Valdi saw H200 demand ramp up throughout January and at first, they didn't know why.

The Valdi team doesn't own chips, it acquires capacity from existing data centers and sells that capacity to customers. The company doesn't know every use case for each chip it makes accessible, but it polled several H200 customers and all of them wanted the chips to run DeepSeek.

"Suddenly, R1 got everybody's attention — it caught fire — and then it kind of went exponential," Mozurkewich said.

American companies are eager to take advantage of DeepSeek's model performance and reasoning innovations, but most are not keen to share their data with a Chinese firm. That means they can either use an API offered by a US firm or run the model on their own hardware.

Since the model is open source, it can be downloaded and run locally without sharing data with DeepSeek.

For Valdi, the majority of its H200 demand is coming from startups, Mozurkewich said.

"It appears the market is reacting to DeepSeek by grabbing the best GPUs available for testing as quickly as possible," he said. "This makes sense, as most companies' current GPUs are likely to continue to work on ongoing tasks they've been allocated to," Mozurkewich continued.

Though many companies are still testing and experimenting, the Valdi team is seeing longer-term requests for additional hardware, suggesting an uptick in demand that could last beyond DeepSeek's initial hype cycle.

Chip light, compute-heavy

DeepSeek's models were trained with less powerful hardware than US models, according to the company's research paper. This efficiency has spooked the stock market.

Players like Meta, OpenAI, and Microsoft have invested billions in AI infrastructure, with billions more on the way. Investors are concerned about whether all that capacity will be needed. DeepSeek was created with fewer, relatively weak chips (though the number is hotly debated).

Training chips aside, using the models for inference is a compute-intensive task, cloud providers say.

"It is not light and easy to run," Srivastava said.

The size of a model is measured in "parameters." More parameters require more compute. The most powerful versions of DeepSeek's models have 678 billion parameters. That's less than OpenAI's ChatGPT-4 which has 1.76 trillion, but more than Meta's largest Llama model, which has 405 billion.

Srivastava said most firms were avoiding the 405 billion parameter Llama model if they coud help it since the smaller version was much easier to run. DeepSeek offers smaller versions too, and even its most powerful version is cheaper to run, which has stoked excitement with firms who want to use the full model, the cloud providers said.

H200 chips are the only widely available Nvidia chip that can run DeepSeek's V3 model in its full form on a single node (8 chips designed to work together).

You can also spread it across more lower-power GPUs, but that requires more expertise and leaves room for error. Adding that complexity almost inevitably slows down performance, Srivastava said.

Nvidia's Blackwell chips will also be able to handle the full V3 model in one node, but these chips have just begun shipping this year.

With demand spiking, finding enough chips to run V3 or R1 at high speed is tough if it hasn't already been allocated.

Baseten doesn't own GPUs; it buys capacity from data centers that do and then tinkers with all the software connections to make models run smoothly. Some of its customers have their own hardware in their own data centers but still hire Baseten to optimize model performance.

Its customers especially value inference speed — the speed that enables an AI-generated voice to converse in real time for example. DeepSeek's capacity at the open source price is a game-changer for its customers, according to Srivastava.

"It does feel like this is an inflection point," he said.

Have a tip or an insight to share? Contact Emma at [email protected] or use the secure messaging app Signal: 443-333-9088

• Apple avoided a hit to its share price from DeepSeek, but it has another China-made problem.
• iPhone sales in the country have fallen again.
• An 11% slide in sales last quarter is raising concerns about Apple amid tough competition in China.

DeepSeek may not have triggered a sell-off panic for Apple, but the iPhone maker has another China headache.

While Apple avoided the pummelling handed to its Silicon Valley peers this week by Chinese AI startup DeepSeek, the company had its own China-related problems on Thursday as it reported an 11% year-on-year drop in revenue in the country to $18.5 billion.

The slide in last quarter's sales is a sign of deepening struggles for Apple in its most important international market — and is raising concerns among some investors and analysts who had forecast better results.

In its last financial year, Apple's net sales in Greater China decreased 7.7% from $72.5 billion the previous year. The year before that, net sales decreased by 2.2%. Understanding if the decline can be stopped is now key for Apple watchers.

During Thursday's earnings call, CEO Tim Cook took the 11% China decline head-on by explaining that "over half of the decline" was driven by changes in "channel inventory."

He also had another explanation. "It's the most competitive market in the world," Cook said.

That competition has been a particular threat to Apple's smartphone sales in China, where domestic companies such as Huawei and Xiaomi have been enticing consumers with 5G-enabled devices that now appear to rival the capabilities of iPhones.

Figures from research firm Counterpoint show that in the last three months of 2024, Apple's smartphone sales fell 18.2%, while Huawei's grew by 15.5% as it was boosted by the launch of its latest high-end smartphone series, the Mate 70.

In a research note after Thursday's earnings, Logan Purk, senior analyst at Edward Jones, said that "sales in China were weak and will remain a point of debate among investors," particularly as Apple contends with "fierce competition in China for 5G phones."

That said, analysts also see an opportunity for Apple to counter the competition later this year once it rolls out one of its biggest bets to China: Apple Intelligence.

The tech giant's generative AI features, unveiled in June last year, are yet to be rolled out in China and are seen as a key driver of a huge upgrade cycle in iPhones in the future.

Dan Ives, a Wedbush analyst, said in a note on Friday that his firm expects growth to "markedly rebound" in China to "double-digits" year-on-year starting in the June quarter, with the "anticipated April rollout" of the Apple Intelligence in the country.

His confidence was boosted by the fact that "markets where Apple Intelligence was available" saw clear year-on-year performance "outpace markets without this AI rollout."

Still, Apple's AI push in China remains untested, with domestic competitors in the country vying to show local consumers that their technology can match America's best.

Apple will need to show Chinese consumers that iPhones are fit for the AI era.

• The backlash against "Emilia Pérez" has turned to its star Karla Sofía Gascón after old tweets were resurfaced.
• Fans highlighted negative tweets that appear to have been posted by Gascón as recently as 2021.
• "Emilia Pérez," the Oscars frontrunner, has faced criticism for its portrayals of Mexico and trans people.

Karla Sofía Gascón, the star of "Emilia Pérez," is under fire for comments and past tweets following claims the most-nominated film this award season has problematic portrayals of Mexico and transgender people.

Critics and fans of "Emilia Pérez," which won 4 Golden Globes and received 13 Oscar nominations, have voiced their opinions about the film on social media. Some say it's boring, and others say it portrays transphobic stereotypes.

Gascón, who became the first out trans woman to be nominated for an Oscar for her role in "Emilia Pérez," has been one of the film's main defenders.

On Tuesday, the Brazilian publication Folha de S.Paulo published a video interview in which Gascón criticized people who were tearing her down to support Fernanda Torres, one of her competitors for the best-actress Oscar.

In response, some sought to have Gascón disqualified from the Oscars, accusing her of breaking an Academy rule prohibiting those involved with a film from sharing public communication that casts a competing movie in a "negative or derogatory light."

Variety reported on Wednesday that Gascón didn't break the rule because she didn't comment on Torres' performance in "I'm Still Here."

On Thursday, the Canadian journalist Sarah Hagi shared screenshots on X of posts that appeared to have been made by Gascón. Business Insider couldn't verify all the screenshots, and some posts seem to have been deleted.

The screenshots contained disparaging remarks about Muslims and Islam.

The posts were written in Spanish but translated through Google by Hagi. This sparked more social media users to search for and share screenshots of other posts that appear to be from Gascón.

Gascón wrote in other posts, seen by BI, that all religions should be banned. In a post from 2020, the actor referred to the COVID-19 vaccine as "the Chinese vaccine" and said it had a chip inside it.

Variety reported that in a post shared in 2021, Gascón referred to the Oscars ceremony that year as an "Afro-Korean festival" and "ugly, ugly gala." That year Daniel Kaluuya, a Black British actor, and Yuh-jung Youn, a South Korean actor, both won Oscars.

Gascón has now deleted her X account.

On Thursday, Gascón shared a statement with several outlets after the posts resurfaced: "I want to acknowledge the conversation around my past social media posts that have caused hurt. As someone in a marginalized community, I know this suffering all too well and I am deeply sorry to those I have caused pain. All my life I have fought for a better world. I believe light will always triumph over darkness."

Some are still calling on the Academy to retract Gascón's Oscar nomination despite the apology.

Representatives for Netflix, Gascón, and the Academy didn't immediately respond to requests for comment from BI.

• To celebrate my kids' graduations, my family and I went on our first cruise.
• Although we had a great time, I wish we had known a few things before getting on board.
• For example, turning our phones on airplane mode would have saved us a lot of money.

2024 was a big year in our household. All three kids were graduating — our oldest from high school and our twins from junior high.

When it came time to celebrate these achievements, we gave them an option. We could throw a party or use the money for an awesome family vacation instead.

So, before our oldest left for college, we came together one last time for a seven-day trip to Alaska on our first-ever cruise.

We were all excited about the idea, and honestly, everyone had a fantastic time. However, I don't think any of us were completely prepared our first cruising experience.

Here are four things I wish we had known before boarding the Celebrity Cruise ship.

Turning our phones on airplane mode would have saved us a lot of money

Our phones are such an important part of our lives that it's almost unheard of to go without them for minutes, let alone days. However, we purposely didn't purchase the ship's WiFi package because we wanted a chance to disconnect and enjoy Alaska's beauty.

What we were unaware of, however, is that once we got away from land, we should have put our phones on airplane mode. Since we didn't, they switched to a service called Cellular at Sea, which uses satellites to keep the phones connected. However, this can be expensive.

Luckily, after racking up $100 in charges within hours of setting sail, AT&T cut my device off until I contacted them. However, this was a costly lesson. Next time, we'll be sure to turn on airplane mode and call our cellular provider to talk about cruise packages.

I wish we would have known about the formal night

Typically, we're a jeans and T-shirt family. It's not that we don't clean up well; it's just that we don't do it often, so a formal night wasn't even on our radar.

We knew we needed nicer clothing for our dinner reservations on the ship, but we didn't know that one night, everyone would go all out.

We skipped dinner that night and hit the buffet instead (which, honestly, we did more often than not anyway), and we certainly weren't the only ones not dressed up.

However, I wish we had known about this in advance, as it would have been exciting to join in on the fun.

Excursions through the cruise line can be expensive

It's no secret that cruising isn't cheap. So, when it came time to book excursions, we knew they would be pricey. However, we still weren't prepared for just how pricey they would be.

Luckily, almost every port we stopped at had third-party companies who would pick passengers up at the dock and take them to do fun and exciting things.

For example, being in Alaska, we wanted to learn about and visit a dog-sled team. Although the cruise line offered this experience, we saved more than 50% by booking with an outside party.

However, it's important to know your schedule and check to make sure the third party will guarantee you'll be back on time — because if you're not, the ship won't wait for you.

Getting a good space on the deck on cruising days can be hard

On the days the ship doesn't stop at a port, finding space to call your own on the boat can be a battle. Tables at breakfast, couches by the windows, and lounge chairs by the pool all become valuable real estate.

Instead of waking up early to claim a space near the pool, we chose to sleep in instead. However, because of this, we should've been prepared to settle for a less-than-prime space to sit and relax.

Instead of a view of the ocean and the mountains, we got stuck in the middle of the ship near the bathrooms.

Even with these small missteps, none of it was enough to put even the slightest damper on what was a fabulous time aboard our first cruise. The next time we take to the seas, though, we'll be better prepared for what's to come.

• Cruise lines advertise several promotions from January through March, known as wave season.
• Many premium cruise lines are promoting discounted fares and complimentary credits.
• This article is part of "Well Charted," a series for travelers planning cruise-bound adventures.

If you want affordable cruise fares and enough onboard credit to indulge in a spa day, consider wave season your vacation-at-sea Black Friday.

The cruise industry rolls out several promotions from January to March, known as wave season. Depending on the cruise line, these offers could involve discounts, free cabin upgrades, or hundreds of dollars' worth of credit.

The potential savings have become catnip for seafaring travelers, especially as strong demand raises cruise fares. Jason Liberty, the president and CEO of Royal Caribbean Group, said on Tuesday that the company already had its strongest-ever wave-season booking week.

Deals such as 50% off Norwegian voyages and 60% off a second Royal Caribbean guest have already ended (though a Royal Caribbean spokesperson told Business Insider it would have more wave-season promotions through March). But there are still plenty of discounts to choose from on higher-end cruise lines.

Which cruise lines are offering wave-season deals?

Holland America and Princess, Carnival's premium brands, are advertising discounts, complimentary cabin upgrades, and free fares for third or fourth guests in the same cabin (though Holland America requires they be under 18).

Royal Caribbean Group's Celebrity Cruises is promoting discounted itineraries and a discount of up to 75% on a second guest.

If you prefer higher-end cruise lines, Azamara, Cunard, and Explora are offering hundreds of dollars' worth of onboard credits.

Seabourn is promoting up to $1,000 worth of credit in conjunction with 15% off select sailings, while Regent Seven Seas is advertising a 20% discount on certain itineraries, complimentary suite upgrades, and discounted deposits.

Other ways to save on your next cruise vacation

There are other ways to find a bargain if you couldn't surf this year's early wave-season deals (or are too impatient to wait for more).

Holland America's standby cruise deal starts at $100 per person per day — though your sailing won't be confirmed until two to seven days before departure.

Companies such as Costco Travel, Holland America, and Royal Caribbean also offer discounted last-minute voyages year-round.

Finally, you could use a travel agent who might be privy to promotions you don't know about.

• I compared the same meal at Applebee's, TGI Fridays, and Chili's.
• I ordered Buffalo bone-in wings and a classic cheeseburger at each chain.
• Applebee's impressed me with its juicy burger but I thought Chili's served the best overall value.

In the casual-dining "value wars," Applebee's, TGI Fridays, and Chili's are three of the biggest competitors.

To determine which of these chains should be crowned the winner, I ordered the same meal — a drink, an order of Buffalo wings, and a classic cheeseburger — at all three and compared them on taste and value.

When it comes to performance, Applebee's, TGI Fridays, and Chili's are faring differently.

TGI Fridays filed for Chapter 11 bankruptcy in November and Reuters reported the chain is facing $37 million in debt. In November, Applebee's also reported a 5.9% decline in same-restaurant sales in the third quarter compared to the year before.

Chili's, meanwhile, has been gaining momentum. In January, the chain's parent company reported a 31% growth in same-restaurant sales from October 2023 to December 2024 and a nearly 20% increase in traffic year over year.

In a conversation with Business Insider, Chili's CMO George Felix said the chain's rise has been propelled by simplifying restaurant menus, changing the chain's approach to marketing and social media, and focusing on value, quality, and hospitality at restaurants.

"You're seeing a lot of competitors throwing different combo meals and meal deals out there at different price points. But I think what's really hard to replicate is we're delivering all of that, combined with a really excellent experience," Felix said.

Here's how the same meal compared at Applebee's, TGI Fridays, and Chili's.

I visited a locally owned TGI Fridays in Massachusetts.

This location is locally owned and operated, so it is not included in the larger company's bankruptcy filing.

TGI Fridays Inc. owns 39 locations in the US, but there are 122 franchised locations in the US and 316 franchised international locations that are not included in the bankruptcy filing.

I ordered a diet soda at all of the chains I visited.

The soda at TGI Fridays was roughly the same size as the drink from Chili's and Applebee's. It cost $3.29, plus tax.

TGI Fridays also offered a cocktail menu, but it didn't seem as central to the brand as the margaritas for Chili's and Applebee's.

Chili's and Applebee's both advertised their drinks on prominently placed menus on the dining table, while TGI Fridays just had the regular cocktail section inside its standard menu.

Chili's and Applebee's also emphasized new, seasonal cocktails. Chili's offered a seasonal margarita of the month for $6, making the restaurants feel more playful.

I ordered an eight count of Buffalo wings.

The wings at TGI Fridays didn't come in a house Buffalo sauce but rather were tossed in Frank's Red Hot Buffalo sauce.

The order of eight wings cost $12.19, plus tax, which was cheaper than the wings from Chili's and Applebee's. These wings also came with a side of sliced celery sticks.

These wings were large and the meat was extremely tender.

I was given a selection of drumsticks and flats in the order. However, while these wings were perfectly meaty and crispy on the outside, the sauce didn't blow me away.

These wings tasted like standard Frank's Red Hot sauce, just like countless others I've had before, with nothing unique or exciting to set them apart.

The burger from TGI Fridays was just OK.

The cheeseburger includes all the classic toppings: tomato, lettuce, American cheese, red onion, and pickles.

While there's no sauce on the burger by default, ketchup is available on every table, and you could easily ask for mustard or ketchup to be added if you prefer.

The burger was priced at $12.49, before tax.

TGI Fridays is also offering a value meal deal that sells its classic cheeseburger with fries and a drink for $9.99, plus tax, which was the most affordable offer out of the three chains.

I thought the TGI Fridays burger needed more sauce.

The bun was dry and untoasted, setting the tone for what turned out to be an overall burger experience that lacked a lot of flavor and moisture.

Although I requested my burger medium, it leaned toward well-done and lacked juiciness. While I appreciated the flavor of the meat itself and the toppings tasted fresh, my praise for this burger ended there.

I reminded myself that this is the chain's simplest burger, so perhaps it's only fair to expect a straightforward flavor profile without much pizzazz.

My second favorite meal came from Applebee's.

I arrived at an Applebee's in Brooklyn on a busy weeknight with two other people and was seated promptly.

I also expected to pay slightly more at this restaurant than at the Chili's and TGI Fridays restaurants I visited since they were both located in Massachusetts, not New York City. However, I found that the prices didn't differ greatly between the two states.

I ordered a drink and nine classic bone-in Buffalo wings to start.

At my local Applebee's in Brooklyn, an order of nine classic bone-in wings costs $18.99, excluding tax and fees. They came with celery sticks and sides of ranch and blue cheese.

I also ordered a diet soda. It cost $3.29, plus tax.

The wings were crispy and the largest out of the three chains.

The wings were tender and juicy, with the sauce delivering a rich, buttery flavor. The Buffalo sauce struck a great balance between its spicy kick and savory, buttery notes, creating a well-rounded flavor.

The Applebee's burger really impressed me.

I ordered the burger as part of the chain's "2 for $2X" deal, which also allowed me to get an order of boneless wings and a chicken tender basket for about $30.

However, the burger typically costs $16.99, excluding tax, at the location I visited in Brooklyn, New York.

The cheeseburger came with two slices of American cheese, lettuce, tomato, red onion, and pickles on a brioche bun.

The exterior of the burger patty was quite dark, which initially made me worry it had been overcooked past the medium level I requested.

To my surprise, the burger turned out to be incredibly juicy and leaned slightly toward medium-rare.

The melted, tangy cheese enveloped the entire burger, creating a perfectly balanced bite. The thick slices of red onion added a bold flavor, while the lettuce and tomato were fresh.

Although this burger lacked a sauce, it remained far from dry, thanks to the melted cheese and a buttery bun.

Despite having similar ingredients to the TGI Fridays burger, this one tasted juicier and more flavorful.

My favorite meal in terms of taste and value came from Chili's.

I visited a Chili's in Massachusetts, but I've also been to the location in Queens, New York, before.

Chili's has always impressed me with its portion sizes, value-focused meals, and its famous Triple Dipper, which the company said is popular among younger customers. CNN reported in October that it accounts for 11% of Chili's sales.

Like at the other two chains, I got a diet soda.

It cost $3.29, plus tax.

I got an order of eight Buffalo wings to start.

Chili's offers boneless and bone-in wings in several flavors, including honey chipotle, barbecue, and Nashville hot.

The order of eight wings cost $14.99, plus tax.

The wings were coated in buttery Buffalo sauce.

The wings came in a selection of drumsticks and flats. Though they were a little on the smaller side compared to the wings from Applebee's, they were piping hot when I picked them up and fried to a golden crisp.

They also packed much more flavor than the other wings I tried, and the chicken meat inside was moist and juicy.

The wings paired well with the chain's signature ranch and decadent blue cheese dressing.

I also ordered a classic cheeseburger.

The Oldtimer burger, which I ordered with cheddar cheese, comes topped with pickles, lettuce, sliced tomato, diced red onions, and mustard.

It cost $13.29, plus tax, and was the largest burger I tried when it came to overall size.

I also could have ordered this burger as part of the chain's "3 For Me" menu and gotten an appetizer, the burger with fries, and a non-alcoholic drink, for $10.99, plus tax. This made me feel like Chili's was really serving up value.

The cheddar cheese was perfectly melted, and the other ingredients tasted extremely fresh.

The only downside was the generous serving of mustard smeared onto the burger patty. The mustard had a strong, sharp flavor, and while I do like mustard, it was a bit overpowering for me.

But the rest of the burger was impressive. The char on the slightly smashed patty was wonderfully crispy, and the other ingredients were incredibly fresh. The red onion added a nice punch of flavor, while the bun held everything together perfectly.

Overall, I liked my experience and meal at Chili's the most.

The food tasted high-quality, and I enjoyed the vibe and more youthful, playful atmosphere of both the restaurant and the menu.

The overall cost of the meal was pretty similar across all three chains, though, as I had expected, the Applebee's in New York was slightly more expensive than the two restaurants I visited in Massachusetts.

Even though the meal from Chili's wasn't the cheapest — the meal from TGI Fridays cost less — I thought it provided the best value when I considered the experience and taste of the food.

"I think a lot of brands mistake the lowest price point for being [the best] value, and I don't think that's giving consumers enough credit," Chili's CMO George Felix told Business Insider. "So for us, we believe value is the entire holistic experience of what you pay for what you get."

Ultimately, when it came to the most flavorful meal with the highest-quality-tasting ingredients, Chili's was the winner for me.

• Trump said he's planning tariffs on Canada and Mexico, which could risk higher gas prices.
• Most of US crude oil imports come from those two countries.
• Economists don't expect US drillers to boost production in order to keep prices down.

President Donald Trump's plan to slap tariffs on Canada and Mexico as soon as February 1 threatens to undercut one of his key campaign promises: lowering prices at the pump.

The US imports around 40% of the crude oil it refines into gas for your car and other vehicles. In 2024, about half of that came from Canada and 11% from Mexico. Economists told Business Insider that slapping those imports with tariffs could strain consumers' wallets at the gas station and have ripple effects across industries.

"Tariffs on crude oil is going to flow right through to the US consumer," Ed Hirs, a lecturer on energy economics at the University of Houston, said. "Canada may absorb some of the cost, but the US will absorb a lot of it, too."

Shortly after taking office, Trump said he could impose a 25% tariff on Mexico and Canada on February 1 as a way to push those countries to crack down on illegal immigration and drugs entering the US. White House spokesperson Karoline Leavitt on Tuesday said the plan "still holds."

Trump told reporters on Thursday in the Oval Office that he's still considering whether to include oil from Canada and Mexico in his tariffs.

Patrick De Haan, head of petroleum analysis at GasBuddy, told Fox Business on Thursday that consumers in the Great Lakes and Midwest regions would likely experience some of the largest impacts of tariffs. He said gas prices there could rise by more than 20 cents within days of the tariffs taking effect.

The US is producing record amounts of crude oil with domestic production amounting to about 60% of crude refined in the US, per the Energy Information Administration. But many refineries aren't equipped to process the light crude from US shale basins, Hirs said. Refineries in states like Michigan, Wisconsin, and Indiana rely on heavy crude from Canadian oil sands and it would be costly and time-consuming to convert the technology.

Hirs said it's difficult to predict how much prices will rise, in part because it depends on what OPEC+ does. The oil cartel has been postponing production increases to boost global prices. Trump has called on OPEC+ to slash prices, and ministers meet on February 3 to discuss his demands.

Even if crude prices rise, Hirs said the signal won't be strong enough for US drillers to boost production. US refineries that handle domestic crude already have more than enough supply.

"Tariffs that increase costs but lower revenue are going to be poisonous for the US oil industry right now," Hirs said.

The American Petroleum Institute, which lobbies on behalf of the US oil and gas industry, is opposed to additional tariffs. The group in December asked the Trump administration's top trade official to exempt crude oil and natural gas from levies because they would "directly undermine energy affordability and availability for consumers while eroding the U.S. oil and natural gas industry's competitiveness both domestically and globally."

Higher gas prices would have knock-on effects in other industries, too, such as fresh fruit and vegetables that are trucked into the US and construction projects that need fuel to power heavy equipment.

Trade war could cause long-term price slumps

While economists predict tariffs would cause a short-term spike in gas prices, they also said broader economic instability may lead to longer-term price drops.

Officials in Canada, Mexico, and China have warned that they will retaliate if Trump implements new tariffs. A trade war may slow down the global economy and depress prices, Hirs said.

"It doesn't take much to throw the global economy into a recession," Hirs said. "That would help lower the price of gasoline and diesel for everybody because there would be less economic activity and less demand."

Bank of America strategist Francisco Blanch similarly told Business Insider in November that tariffs will likely curb global trade, driving down oil and gas prices.

• As a private chef, I shop for groceries via Amazon delivery at least four times a week.
• Organic carrots and multicolored bell peppers are great for crudités.
• I like the organic chicken thighs from Whole Foods when I can't make it to a butcher.

I'm a private chef and a mom, so convenience is key for me when it comes to errands and essential tasks.

I often don't have the time to run to the grocery store when I have three different clients to cook for in one day. When I'm in a pinch, I turn to Amazon's grocery delivery services.

The online retailer has a few options, like Amazon Fresh and GrubHub, but I typically choose from its Whole Foods items.

Now that I've checked out dozens, if not hundreds, of shopping carts via the Amazon app, I know exactly which items I can confidently order online.

Parmesan is pretty much always in my cart.

The one item I always add to my cart is grated Mitica Parmigiano Reggiano. The Whole Foods product costs $26 a pound, but it's worth it.

It's an imported dream of beautiful, crystalized, salty cheese that adds creaminess and complexity to my pastas, soups, and roasted vegetables.

I like the grated version because it's ready to use whenever I need it.

Bell peppers fill out a number of dishes.

I love 365's three packs of peppers for stir-fries, crudités, and frittatas.

I can order an assorted pack of three for $5 (less than $2 a pepper), which is great when I'm on a budget.

I use cilantro a lot in my cooking — at home and with clients.

I use a lot of cilantro, but unfortunately, herbs can be expensive.

Luckily, the fresh cilantro bunches from Whole Foods are generously sized and super flavorful. A regular bunch is $1, and an organic one is $2.

I can usually make one bunch last a few days between cooking for my clients and my family.

Chicken is one of my go-to protein sources.

I prefer buying meat from a butcher, but sometimes, I just don't have the time.

I'm actually very happy with the quality of Whole Foods' organic chicken. It's flavorful and cooks up tender and juicy.

I love getting skin-on thighs for grilled tandoori chicken or any one-pot dishes that call for crispy skin.

At $6 a pound, the price also feels reasonable to me.

Carrots are great for dinner parties.

Organic carrots with their tops on are my go-to for dinner-party crudités. They also go great on a pan of roasted veggies.

The $3 bunch of carrots cooks up beautifully, and the array of purple, orange, and yellow hues impresses kids and adults alike.

Tacos are a hit with my clients, so tortillas are a must.

Many of my clients request different types of tacos throughout the week, so I always make sure to order good tortillas to elevate the flavors.

Vita Hermosa tortillas aren't available everywhere, but when I order via Amazon, they're usually in stock at Whole Foods.

I get an eight-pack for about $6.

The 365 fire-roasted corn is one of a kind.

This might seem random, but not many stores carry pre-roasted frozen corn.

I love adding 365's $3.70 pack of fire-roasted corn to my cart when I'm shopping online. I'll toss the kernels in salads, pile them on top of my tacos, or even add them to soups.

• Meta CEO Mark Zuckerberg told employees there would be no changes to the hybrid work policy.
• In a meeting held Thursday, the Meta chief said "the status quo is fine."
• Most employees are expected to work in an office at least three days a week.

The future of in-office work was top of mind for Meta employees on Thursday during a wide-ranging Q&A with CEO Mark Zuckerberg, according to a recording of the meeting reviewed by Business Insider. The bottom line? No changes for now.

Most Meta employees are expected to head into the office at least three days a week, but some staff have worried the company would change the policy and demand a full in-office return.

Following a long opening monologue that touched on AI assistants, augmented-reality glasses, and the "intense" year ahead, Zuckerberg turned to questions submitted by staff. The top-voted question was about remote work.

"Basic summary: no change," Zuckerberg told staff. "There's a lot of things going on in the world. I just have not been focused on this at all. I think the status quo is fine. Carry on."

Zuckerberg's answer was met with applause by employees watching the all-hands live. The Meta chief remarked that two of the top-five voted questions submitted concerned in-office work.

Meta's three-day policy is in line with those of some other Big Tech companies, including Google. However, some companies want workers back full time. Dell sent a memo to employees on Friday calling them back into the office five days a week.

At Thursday's all-hands, Zuckerberg told employees to "buckle up" for an "intense" year ahead. He defended several recent changes around content moderation and fact-checking and said the company had an opportunity to have a "productive partnership with the United States government."

Zuckerberg also discussed how DeepSeek could benefit Meta's open-source artificial intelligence strategy and why Meta was slow to respond to TikTok's rise.

Do you work at Meta? Contact BI reporters from a nonwork email and device at [email protected] or [email protected]. You can also reach them via Signal at hughlangley.01 or jyotimann.11.

• Chinese startup DeepSeek shook the tech world and markets when it released R1, its new AI model.
• The West is now trying to reproduce R1 on its own terms and cut out Chinese servers.
• Recreating R1 from scratch can help researchers build better models and validate DeepSeek's claims.

Silicon Valley doesn't want to get caught out again. It's scrambling to replicate DeepSeek's AI model, the cheaper Chinese tech that shook Wall Street and is freely available for anyone to adopt.

Companies like Microsoft and Amazon have already made versions of DeepSeek's R1 models available on their cloud platforms. This allows people to use the models, which appear to match the capabilities of rivals like OpenAI, while keeping data from being sent to servers in China.

But there are also attempts to replicate DeepSeek's cost-efficient AI from the ground up — and see if all of the Chinese AI lab's market-moving claims hold up.

One major effort is being led by Hugging Face, a platform for researchers in AI's open-source community to collaborate and share their trade research notes and ideas for free.

Leandro von Werra, head of research at Hugging Face, told Business Insider that the company expected to complete its replication efforts within "weeks." He described the mood at Hugging Face as "kind of like Avengers assemble" as they dissect the inner workings of R1.

DeepSeek obtained open-source licensing for its model from MIT, which means a lot of the vital components of the recipe needed to build R1 have been laid out in the company's publicly available technical paper.

However, there are some elements of R1 that remain unclear.

In a December paper on V3, DeepSeek's earlier model, the Chinese company said training cost $5.6 million in total. The cost was calculated based on its use of H800 GPUs, a less powerful version of Nvidia's top chips, at a rental price of $2 per GPU hour.

Right now, no one can be quite sure what the actual development cost of R1 was, von Werra told BI.

DeepSeek's research paper also did not share what was required to bake reasoning capabilities into V3 to then produce R1.

That said, von Werra thinks it won't remain a mystery for long. "I don't know about the compute number, we can only guess at this time," he said. "I think one thing that's exciting about our reproduction is we're going to find out pretty quickly if the numbers hold up."

Learning from DeepSeek

Some quarters of Silicon Valley responded swiftly to the launch of DeepSeek. This week, Meta set up "war rooms" for its researchers to analyze DeepSeek, The Information reported. Sam Altman, the CEO of OpenAI, said Tuesday his company would accelerate the release of "better models."

DeepSeek's decision to publish its findings and make its R1 model open gives researchers worldwide an insight into its novel approach.

The main technique used to make R1 so capable was "pure reinforcement learning," DeepSeek's paper said. This, Hugging Face researchers said in a blog on Tuesday, can "teach a base language model how to reason without any human supervision."

The researchers also know more specific technical details about why R1 caused such a stir in Silicon Valley and wiped $1 trillion from US stocks on Monday. For instance, the reasoning model is what's known as a "mixture of experts" model — industry-speak for a model that can be "pre-trained with far less compute." It also involves subtle changes to its architecture by introducing techniques like "multi-token prediction," first introduced by Meta, that make models more efficient.

Hugging Face's von Werra notes that details like this from DeepSeek have helped the industry better understand how a reasoning model like OpenAI's closed-source o1 was built. "Everybody thought this is the secret that is going to take a while to crack," he said.

DeepSeek comes to platforms

Days after its launch, DeepSeek flew to the top of Apple's Top Free Apps chart. While everyone wanted to try the latest AI tool, DeepSeek's policy of storing user data in China has prompted security concerns.

This spurred US companies to make R1 available on their own platforms so customers could use the Chinese AI model while cutting out China's servers.

Lin Qiao, CEO of Fireworks AI and former head of the PyTorch team at Meta, told BI that one clear reason for doing so was to ensure AI developers and users continue to get access to top model innovations.

"The approach we have been taking is always to enable state-of-the-art models for developers the fastest," she said. "DeepSeek is one example."

Her company, founded in 2022, made R1 available on its platform after congratulating DeepSeek for "pushing the boundaries of what's possible in open models." It has been made available via its serverless service, as well as through on-demand and for enterprise customers.

Others have followed suit. On Wednesday, Microsoft announced that it was making R1 available in its model catalog on its AI development platform Azure AI Foundry to make it "accessible on a trusted, scalable, and enterprise-ready platform."

Asha Sharma, corporate vice president at the tech giant, wrote in a blog that R1 "offers a powerful, cost-efficient model," but one that it had done "rigorous red teaming and safety evaluations" on before introducing as a new model to its library.

Amazon Web Services is making a similar move. Swami Sivasubramanian, vice president of AI and data at AWS, said this week that the company's "commitment to AI accessibility" meant R1 was being made available on its platforms like SageMaker and Bedrock.

Perplexity CEO Aravind Srinivas, whose AI startup made R1 available to users of its search platform this week, said in a Tuesday X post that downloading the model onto its servers could also help control the way it responds to user queries as well as ensure those queries don't go to servers in China.

DeepSeek's AI appears to censor sensitive information about China, such as refusing to answer questions about the 1989 Tiananmen Square protests. Srinivas said that Perplexity's version of R1 had no censorship and shared its accurate response to what happened in Tiananmen Square.

David Sacks, the White House's AI czar, offered one reason why Perplexity's R1 integration was an important way to reproduce R1 in the West. "This is one of several ways that you can try DeepSeek R1 without downloading the app or sharing any data with a Chinese company," he said on X.

Many see DeepSeek as an example of China challenging American AI hegemony using a tried-and-tested playbook. OpenAI, which has a lot to lose from DeepSeek making its technology freely available, said on Wednesday it's investigating whether the Chinese firm "inappropriately" replicated its models for training.

For von Werra, it's a full-circle moment. The whole field started as open-source, so seeing efforts to make a leading reasoning model available for free is welcome, he said.

"I think in the end, everybody's going to get better models and do cooler things," he said. "I feel like it's a win-win situation."

• OpenAI and the White House have accused DeepSeek of using ChatGPT to cheaply train its new chatbot.
• Experts in tech law say OpenAI has little recourse under intellectual property and contract law.
• OpenAI's terms of use may apply, but are largely unenforcible, experts say.

This week, OpenAI and the White House accused DeepSeek of something akin to theft.

In a flurry of press statements, they said the China-based upstart had bombarded OpenAI's chatbots with queries, hoovering up the resulting data trove to quickly and cheaply train a model that's now almost as good.

The Trump administration's top AI "czar" said this training process, called "distilling," amounts to intellectual property theft. OpenAI, meanwhile, told Business Insider and other outlets that it is investigating whether "DeepSeek may have inappropriately distilled our models."

OpenAI is not saying if the company plans to pursue legal action, instead promising what a spokesperson termed "aggressive, proactive countermeasures to protect our technology."

But could they? Could they sue DeepSeek on "you stole our content" grounds, much like the grounds OpenAI was itself sued on in an ongoing 2023 copyright claim filed by The New York Times and other news outlets?

Business Insider posed this question to experts in technology law, who said challenging DeepSeek in the courts would be an uphill battle for OpenAI, now that the content-appropriation shoe is on the other foot.

OpenAI would have a hard time proving an intellectual property or copyright claim, these lawyers said.

"The question is whether ChatGPT outputs" — meaning the answers it generates in response to queries — "are copyrightable at all," said Mason Kortz of Harvard Law School.

That's because it's unclear that the answers ChatGPT spits out qualify as "creativity," he said.

"There's a doctrine that says creative expression is copyrightable, but facts and ideas are not," explained Kortz, who teaches at Harvard's Cyberlaw Clinic.

"There's a huge question in intellectual property law right now about whether the outputs of a generative AI can ever constitute creative expression or if they are necessarily unprotected facts."

Could OpenAI roll those dice anyway, and claim that its outputs actually are protected?

That would be unlikely, the lawyers said.

OpenAI is already on the record in the New York Times copyright case arguing that training AI is an allowable "fair use" exception to copyright protection.

If they do a 180 and tell DeepSeek that training is not a fair use, "that might come back to kind of bite them," said Kortz. "DeepSeek could say, 'Hey, weren't you just saying that training is fair use?'"

There's arguably a distinction between the Times and DeepSeek cases, Kortz adds.

"Maybe it's more transformative to turn news articles into a model" — as the Times accuses OpenAI of doing — "than it is to turn outputs of a model into another model" as DeepSeek may have done, Kortz said.

"But this still puts OpenAI in a pretty tricky situation with regard to the line it's been towing regarding fair use."

A breach of contract lawsuit is more likely

A breach-of-contract lawsuit is much likelier than an IP-based lawsuit, though it comes with its own set of problems, said Anupam Chander, who teaches technology law at Georgetown University.

The terms of service for Big Tech chatbots like those developed by OpenAI and Anthopic forbid using their content as training fodder for a competing AI model.

"So perhaps that's the lawsuit you might possibly bring — a contract-based claim, not an IP-based claim," Chander said.

"Not 'you copied something from me,' but that you benefited from my model to do something that you were not allowed to do under our contract."

There's a possible hitch, Chander and Kortz say. OpenAI's terms of service require that most claims be resolved through arbitration, not lawsuits. There's an exception for lawsuits "to stop unauthorized use or abuse of the Service or intellectual property infringement or misappropriation.

There's a larger hitch, though, experts say.

"You should know that the brilliant scholar Mark Lemley and a coauthor argue that AI terms of use are likely unenforceable," Chander said. He was referring to a January 10 paper, The Mirage of Artificial Intelligence Terms of Use Restrictions, by Stanford Law's Mark A. Lemley and Peter Henderson of Princeton University's Center for Information Technology.

To date, "no model creator has actually tried to enforce these terms with monetary penalties or injunctive relief," the paper says.

"This is likely for good reason: we think that the legal enforceability of these licenses is questionable," it says. That's in part because model outputs "are largely not copyrightable" and because laws like the Digital Millennium Copyright Act and the Computer Fraud and Abuse Act "offer limited recourse," it argues.

"I think they are likely unenforceable," Lemley told BI of OpenAI's terms of service, "because DeepSeek didn't take anything copyrighted by OpenAI, and because courts generally won't enforce agreements not to compete in the absence of an IP right that would prevent that competition."

Lawsuits between parties in different nations, each with its own legal and enforcement systems, are always tricky, Kortz said.

Even if OpenAI cleared all the above hurdles and won a judgment from a US court or arbitrator, "in order to get DeepSeek to turn over money or stop doing what it's doing, the enforcement would come down to the Chinese legal system," he said.

Here, OpenAI would be at the mercy of another extremely complicated area of law — the enforcement of foreign judgments and the balancing of individual and corporate rights and national sovereignty — that stretches back to before the founding of the United States.

"So this is, a long, complicated, fraught process," Kortz added.

Could OpenAI have protected itself better from a distilling incursion?

"They could have used technical measures to block repeated access to their site," Lemley said. "But doing so would also interfere with normal customers."

He added, "I don't think they could, or should, have a valid legal claim against the searching of uncopyrightable information from a public site."

Representatives for DeepSeek did not immediately respond to a request for comment.

"We know that groups in the PRC are actively working to use methods, including what's known as distillation, to try to replicate advanced U.S. AI models," OpenAI spokesperson Rhianna Donaldson told BI in an emailed statement.

"We are aware of and reviewing indications that DeepSeek may have inappropriately distilled our models, and will share information as we know more," the statement said. "We take aggressive, proactive countermeasures to protect our technology and will continue working closely with the US government to protect the most capable models being built here."

• When we travel, my partner prefers heading outdoors but I like exploring big cities.
• We plan trips we both enjoy by finding experiences and stays that feature our shared interests.
• We stay open-minded when trying activities one of us is way more excited about than the other.

In many ways, my partner and I are proof that opposites attract.

For starters, he adores mountains and hikes, while I prefer a big city and spas. Although we both love to travel, our preferred itineraries, activities, and destinations can be pretty different.

Over time, though, we've figured out how to plan couples trips that we can both enjoy together.

We try to book experiences and stays that combine our interests

Whenever possible, we try to find activities and excursions that feature something we're both passionate about, like cycling.

I love a spin class, and he adores mountain biking. So, when we travel, we look for bike tours. One of our favorite trips featured a bike tour through the French countryside that included a picnic.

We also combined our interests on a day trip to Tolantongo, just a few hours north of Mexico City.

Since we both enjoy being in and around water, we relaxed in hillside hot-spring pools, ziplined, explored caves hidden behind waterfalls, and lounged by a thermal river to end the day.

The experience combined the relaxing vibes of a spa day (my favorite) with a stunning outdoor landscape (his favorite) that blew us both away.

Plus, we try to combine our priorities and preferences when booking accommodations.

Last summer, he wanted to go horseback riding and camping in Montana's Big Sky. So, I found an Airbnb close enough to the wilderness (for him) with a massive bathtub (for me) to relax in after a day in the great outdoors.

We're patient and open-minded when doing activities the other is really excited about

Sometimes, the best gift you can give your partner is letting them introduce you to an activity that makes them light up inside.

This helps us lean into our individual interests while still making memories together. For example, I love spending a day vintage shopping for the perfect pair of boots or a jacket that I definitely don't need.

My partner is wonderful and patient as I rummage through racks of secondhand goodies — and I'm the same way when he takes me on a three-hour hike.

Plus, while trying activities my partner is excited about, I've learned more about myself and what I enjoy.

I'll never forget the rush of endorphins I felt while whitewater rafting in Colorado or how special it was to see a moose and her baby while hiking in Wyoming.

When in doubt, we take turns planning

If we're struggling to find common ground, we'll take turns choosing destinations and activities.

Usually, if I pick one trip, he'll choose the next. If neither of us really has a preference, we'll draw a destination out of a hat.

Doing so is easy because we prioritize each other's happiness and know each other's limits — he knows I'm open to camping, but only if there's electricity nearby.

• Sam Mewis launched the women's soccer podcast "The Women's Game" about a year ago.
• The former US soccer star has grown the show into one of the most listened-to in women's sports.
• Mewis explains her conversational approach and expansion plans with the media company Men In Blazers.

Former US soccer star Sam Mewis is part of a new wave of media personalities reshaping women's sports coverage.

The 32-year-old former US Women's National Team player was considered one of the best in her position until a knee injury forced her to retire from soccer in 2023. Mewis could no longer play the game she had dedicated her life to, but that didn't mean she couldn't stay close to it.

Mewis joined the soccer-media company Men In Blazers Media Network to launch about a year ago its first women's sports vertical with a podcast, called "The Women's Game."

Until recently, women's sports were underserved by mainstream media. Because TV coverage was not widely available, women's sports have expanded in other areas like podcasting.

Mewis has built "The Women's Game" into one of the most listened-to podcasts in women's soccer. According to podcast database Podscan, the show had averaged 11,700 listeners per episode since its launch and was the 22nd-most listened-to soccer podcast in the US on Apple Podcasts as of January 30. The other podcasts on the list largely focused on the men's sport.

"In many ways, what we were able to accomplish last year exceeded my expectations for going into the first year of a brand new vertical," Mewis told Business Insider.

'The Women's Game' feels like talking to a good friend about soccer

"The Women's Game," which has over 30,000 subscribers on YouTube, has stood out for its conversational approach.

Guests make regular appearances, some of whom are friends of Mewis from her days playing professional soccer, while others play on international teams. To date, its 45 guests have included USWNT captain Lindsey Horan, US teammates Rose Lavelle and Kelley O'Hara, and international players like Daniëlle van de Donk.

In addition to the flagship podcast, Mewis has shows under "The Women's Game" banner, including "Friendlies, " where she interviews athletes one-on-one, and "Good Vibes FC," which she cohosts with her former teammates Becky Sauerbrunn and Lynn Williams.

The podcasts aim to create an environment that makes listeners feel like they're talking with friends about soccer rather than getting hard analysis. In a recent Christmas special with 39,000 YouTube views, Mewis brought on players including Lavelle, O'Hara, and former US teammates Ali Kreiger and Megan Rapinoe, who debated topics from egg nog versus mulled wine to their favorite holiday songs.

Mewis attributed the tone of the show to her strong relationships with her cohosts, including Williams, with whom she previously hosted the Just Women's Sports podcast "Snacks."

"I feel safe when I'm with them to be myself and to explore topics that maybe I don't know every single thing about," Mewis said.

She said the approach also helped her take ownership of her personality. As a professional athlete, she had to be careful about what she said to the press, but she could control the narrative with her own show.

"It is an opportunity for players, people in the media, and in the public eye to show a side of themselves that we don't always get to see," said Mewis.

Podcasts offer regular content to hungry women's soccer fans. When the USWNT isn't playing, or the National Women's Soccer League isn't in season, coverage of the sport has been hard to find. Research firm Nielsen found through fan surveys that the biggest barriers to seeing women's sports have been a lack of information and access.

With "The Women's Game," Mewis aims to cover all sides of the sport, said Roger Bennett, one of the cofounders of Men In Blazers, who followed Mewis during her playing days and approached her for the podcast.

"She said, 'I want to cover this women's game, not just American, I want to cover it all globally, have the biggest names in world football come and talk about themselves to the audience and to build a regular narrative around the biggest games in women's football,'" Bennett said. "That's exactly what we've set out to do."

The popularity of women's soccer has risen worldwide. In a 2023 Nielsen survey, 41% of the global respondents said they were excited about the Women's World Cup, rising from 34% before the 2019 tournament.

Fresh funding could help expand 'The Women's Game'

Looking ahead, Mewis is preparing for two major soccer events: the 2027 Women's World Cup and the 2028 Olympics. She also wants to bring international tournaments like the Euros or the Women's Africa Cup of Nations to North American audiences.

She wants to expand the vertical with more weekly programming, as well. It currently publishes two to three times a week across its three podcasts.

"The Women's Game" is set to receive fresh funding from a $15 million Series A round that Men In Blazers announced earlier this month.

"As women's soccer explodes and just continues to grow, there's more and more space for people like me and companies to invest in content production around women's soccer," Mewis said.

• I grew up as a latchkey kid and loved roaming the city by myself.
• But I struggled to give my tween the same independence I loved so much.
• At 13, I caved and let her walk alone to a café.

For months, my 12-year-old daughter begged me to let her walk alone to the strip of stores and cafés a half-mile away from our house in Los Angeles. Craving independence, she wanted to get ice cream, pick out a friend's birthday gift, and do her homework at the coffee shop (anything) so long as she could do it by herself.

Each earnest request was met with a resounding "No." Resentment radiated from my daughter's big eyes. I was the evil witch to her Rapunzel. Instead of a tower, she was trapped in a California bungalow.

Attempting to compromise, I offered to let her go solo on one condition. I'd trail out of sight behind her.

"You won't even see me," I argued.
"Not the same, and you know it!" she shot back.

I was terrified of giving her the freedom I grew up with.

I was a latchkey kid

I understood her desire to explore on her own. I was a latchkey kid growing up in Seoul, where my father was stationed. Once school was over, I'd scarf down some Spam with kimchi while watching my favorite soap opera and head out the door of our apartment. There was nothing I loved more than roaming the bustling city.

I'd walk to the corner store and buy a grape-flavored Popsicle in the shape of a shark that was raspberry red in the middle when I bit into it. I'd ride my bike along the Han River, ferry boats and gleaming skyscrapers streaking by in my periphery. Sometimes, I'd peruse my favorite stationary store, running my fingers along the crisp paper of Keroppi the Frog notebooks. Embedded in these memories was the gratification of doing it all without adult supervision.

I was terrified of giving her the same freedom

But as a 42-year-old mother, I was terrified of allowing my daughter the same freedom. Watching cars blazing through our neighborhood, barely coming to a rolling pause before blasting past a stop sign, my chest seized at the idea of her navigating the streets without me to protect her.

My fears didn't stop at speeding vehicles. Push notifications from apps like My Citizen and Nextdoor were frequent reminders of nefarious activities taking place. In one harrowing post, a girl was accosted and groped by a man as she walked to her middle school in a nearby suburb. Reading the scary details, I thrust my phone into the air. "See!" I declared. My daughter sighed.

Thirty years earlier, when I was 12, I escaped an attempted abduction shortly after my family moved from Korea to the US. In Washington State, a man followed me and tried to get me into his car as I made my way home alone.

The terrifying incident imprinted me with a deep paranoia. It was leaching into my child's adolescence, causing strife. I wanted to keep her safe, but tethering her tightly to my side only created distance between us. She was frustrated and angry. More than once, she called me "Smother."

I needed her to know I trusted her

How could I expect her to be confident and self-sufficient if I didn't show I trusted her? I knew I needed to let go, to let her experience and navigate the world without me holding her hand. To help quell my paranoia, I deleted My Citizen and Nextdoor. Those apps were gasoline to my fiery anxieties.

One Saturday morning, I swallowed the bile gathering in the back of my throat, gripped the kitchen island for support, and told my daughter she could walk by herself to the coffee shop. Her face shone as she promised to abide by my safety precautions. Watching her skip down the front walkway without me next to her, my knees buckled.

Pacing the kitchen, phone clutched in my sweaty hands, I started at her shared location. For a half-mile, the blue dot moved from block to block. Then it stopped. My phone chimed. "I'm here, Mama!"

An hour later, my daughter returned, beaming and exuberant, sipping an iced matcha latte. Meanwhile, I looked like I'd just crawled out from the trenches.

Now 13, my daughter has ventured out by herself on many occasions. Though my nerves still rattle, they've improved with time. When she walks back through our front door, pride and confidence fill her eyes — and mine, too.

• SoftBank is in talks to invest up to $25 billion in OpenAI, which could value it around $300 billion.
• The deal could make OpenAI the joint-second most valuable tech company after SpaceX.
• The funding round could see OpenAI pump $15 billion into the Stargate AI infrastructure project.

SoftBank is preparing to lead fresh investment into OpenAI at a $300 billion valuation, Business Insider understands — a move that would value the ChatGPT maker the same as TikTok owner ByteDance.

The Japanese investment giant is in talks to invest up to $25 billion in OpenAI, the Financial Times first reported.

While SpaceX is the most valuable private company in the world, the funding round could push OpenAI up to second spot alongside Chinese tech giant ByteDance. OpenAI currently ranks as the third-most valuable private tech firm.

Talks between OpenAI and SoftBank are ongoing, which means details around the the round size and valuation are subject to change. If the AI juggernaut hits its target valuation of $300 billion, it would nearly double its current valuation of $157 billion.

SpaceX's valuation is around $350 billion after the Elon Musk-owned company agreed to buy back $1.25 billion worth of stock at $185 a share in December. ByteDance, the parent company of TikTok, similarly catapulted its valuation to $300 billion following a buyback offer, offering investors a price of about $180 per share, the Wall Street Journal reported in November.

OpenAI could become one of three companies globally with a centibillion valuation; Stripe and Shein follow suit with valuations of $70 billion and $66 billion, respectively.

Prior to SoftBank's latest investment talks, OpenAI raised nearly $20 billion from investment heavyweights, including Thrive Capital, Khosla Ventures, and Nvidia.

If SoftBank invests $15 to $20 billion into OpenAI, it would overtake Microsoft — which has poured around $13 billion into the company so far — as OpenAI's lead investor.

Such a deal would mark the most significant bet yet on the generative AI boom from SoftBank and form a key part of the wider ambitions of its billionaire founder, Masayoshi Son, to usher in an era of "artificial super intelligence."

Son, who made his original fortune from a timely bet on Alibaba in the dot-com era, has previously spoken about his nonstop use of OpenAI's ChatGPT, and predicted AI that is 10,000 times smarter than humans will arrive by the midpoint of the next decade.

A fresh investment from SoftBank would also further deepen its relationship with OpenAI after the companies announced plans last week to form Stargate, a joint venture that aims to spend up to $500 billion on AI infrastructure projects in the US over the next four years.

SoftBank's Son will serve as chairman of the project, which was unveiled at the White House by President Donald Trump. Initial equity funders include Oracle and the UAE's MGX alongside SoftBank and OpenAI. The project will begin deploying $100 billion immediately, according to OpenAI.

It is not yet clear where the companies will source the capital from, with OpenAI currently lossmaking. It has been suggested that SoftBank's proposed equity investment could allow OpenAI to invest around $15 billion in Stargate.

SoftBank declined to comment. OpenAI did not immediately respond to a Business Insider request for comment.

• There have been 66 album of the year winners since the first Grammys ceremony in 1959.
• Taylor Swift made history in 2024 as the first person to win album of the year four times.
• Beyoncé, Chappell Roan, Sabrina Carpenter, and Billie Eilish are among those nominated this year.

The 67th Annual Grammy Awards will be held on Sunday in Los Angeles. 

Every nominee hopes to clinch the top prize of the night: album of the year. The coveted prize has previously gone to Hollywood icons like Judy Garland, Barbra Streisand, and The Beatles, and is always the last award of the night to be announced.

In 2024, Taylor Swift took the prize and made history as the first person to win album of the year four times. She previously tied with Stevie Wonder, Frank Sinatra, and Paul Simon, who all hold three album of the year wins. 

Swift could break her own record again this year for most album of the year wins if "The Tortured Poets Department" takes home the award.

However, she's got strong competition in the category. Grammy darlings Billie Eilish and Beyoncé, as well as pop superstars Sabrina Carpenter and Charli XCX, whose hit songs "Espresso" and "360" dominated pop culture this summer, are all nominated. Another nominee, Chappell Roan, has had a standout year, with six Grammy nominations to show for it. Rounding out the category are the multi-talented André 3000 and Jacob Collier, whom BI's Callie Ahlgrim called "dark horses in a pop-heavy album of the year contest."

Here's every winner of album of the year throughout history.

1959: Henry Mancini — "The Music from Peter Gunn"

Mancini, pictured left, was the inaugural winner of the award.

1960: Frank Sinatra — "Come Fly With Me!"

Sinatra won his first of three album of the year awards in 1960.

1961: Bob Newhart — "The Button-Down Mind of Bob Newhart"

Newhart starred in "The Big Bang Theory" as Professor Proton.

1962: Judy Garland — "Judy Garland at Carnegie Hall"

Garland was recently played by Renee Zellweger in "Judy," for which she won an Oscar — one award that eluded Garland.

1963: Vaughn Meader — "The First Family"

The album was a musical spoof based on the Kennedys.

1964: Barbra Streisand — "The Barbra Streisand Album"

Released on February 25, 1963, it was the debut album by Barbra Streisand. She is a rare EGOT winner: She's won an Emmy, Grammy, Oscar, and Tony.

1965: Stan Getz & João Gilberto — "Getz/Gilberto"

This year marked the first time two people won the award.

1966: Frank Sinatra — "September of My Years"

Sinatra won consecutive album of the year awards in 1966 and 1967. He is one of only two artists to do so, the other being Stevie Wonder.

1967: Frank Sinatra — "A Man and His Music"

Until 2024 — when Taylor Swift won for the fourth time — Sinatra held the joint record for the most wins for this award.

1968: The Beatles — "Sgt. Pepper's Lonely Hearts Club Band"

The Beatles became the first band to win album of the year.

1969: Glen Campbell — "By the Time I Get to Phoenix"

Campbell beat The Beatles and Simon & Garfunkel to the award this year.

1970: Blood, Sweat & Tears — "Blood, Sweat & Tears"

Johnny Cash and The Beatles lost the award to Blood, Sweat & Tears.

1971: Simon & Garfunkel — "Bridge Over Troubled Water"

Paul Simon also won twice as a solo artist. Therefore, he has technically won this award three times.

1972: Carole King — "Tapestry"

Carole King has won a total of five competitive categories, plus three honorary awards.

1973: George Harrison & Friends (Ravi Shankar, Bob Dylan, Leon Russell, Ringo Starr, Billy Preston, Eric Clapton, and Klaus Voormann) — "The Concert for Bangladesh"

Harrison also won the award as a member of The Beatles in 1968.

1974: Stevie Wonder — "Innervisions"

Stevie Wonder won his first of three album of the year awards in 1974.

1975: Stevie Wonder — "Fulfillingness' First Finale"

Wonder won consecutive awards in 1975 and 1976, the first person to do so since Frank Sinatra in 1966 and 1967.

1976: Paul Simon — "Still Crazy After All These Years"

This was the first of Simon's wins as a solo artist.

1977: Stevie Wonder — "Songs in the Key of Life"

Wonder won his third album of the year this year, making it three wins in four years.

1978: Fleetwood Mac — "Rumours"

Fleetwood Mac beat John Williams and his "Star Wars" score to the award this year.

1979: Various Artists — "Saturday Night Fever" soundtrack

This year marked the first time the winner was listed as "various artists," as well as the first time a film's soundtrack or score won the award.

1980: Billy Joel — "52nd Street"

Billy Joel beat Donna Summer and Kenny Rogers to become the first winner of the 1980s.

1981: Christopher Cross — "Christopher Cross"

Christopher Cross beat three-time winner Frank Sinatra to claim this award.

1982: John Lennon and Yoko Ono — "Double Fantasy"

John Lennon won his second award with his wife, Yoko, following his first win with The Beatles in 1968.

1983: Toto — "Toto IV"

Paul McCartney lost his first nomination for this award as a solo artist to the band.

1984: Michael Jackson — "Thriller"

Michael Jackson won eight awards this year.

1985: Lionel Richie — "Can't Slow Down"

Lionel Richie beat legend Tina Turner to the award this year.

1986: Phil Collins — "No Jacket Required"

This album contained two US No. 1 hits: "One More Night" and "Sussudio."

1987: Paul Simon — "Graceland"

Simon won his second award as a solo artist this year.

1988: U2 — "The Joshua Tree"

This was the first of U2's two album of the year wins.

1989: George Michael — "Faith"

"Faith" contained hits such as "Faith" and "One More Try."

1990: Bonnie Raitt — "Nick of Time"

Bonnie Raitt beat Tom Petty's "Full Moon Fever" to this award in 1990.

1991: Quincy Jones & Various Artists — "Back on the Block"

Surprisingly, this was Quincy Jones's first win in this category, despite serving as a producer on several album of the year-winning albums.

1992: Natalie Cole — "Unforgettable... with Love"

Natalie Cole won the award this year, preventing nominee Paul Simon from winning his third award for album of the year.

1993: Eric Clapton — "Unplugged"

As well as winning this prestigious award, Clapton is the only three-time inductee to the Rock and Roll Hall of Fame.

1994: Whitney Houston — "The Bodyguard"

This was Houston's only win in this category and only the second time a movie's soundtrack won this award.

1995: Tony Bennett — "MTV Unplugged"

This album was created as a result of Bennett's appearance on the MTV show "MTV Unplugged."

1996: Alanis Morissette — "Jagged Little Pill"

Alanis Morissette beat Michael Jackson and Mariah Carey to win this award.

1997: Celine Dion — "Falling Into You"

Two years after her win here, Dion also won four Grammys for her "Titanic" song, "My Heart Will Go On."

1998: Bob Dylan — "Time Out of Mind"

In 2001, Dylan added to his awards collection with a best original song Oscar for "Things Have Changed" from the film "Wonder Boys."

1999: Lauryn Hill — "The Miseducation of Lauryn Hill"

Lauryn Hill beat Shania Twain and Madonna to win this award.

2000: Santana — "Supernatural"

Santana won this award with their 18th studio album.

2001: Steely Dan — "Two Against Nature"

Steely Dan beat Radiohead, Paul Simon, Eminem, and Beck to win this award.

2002: Various Artists — "O Brother, Where Art Thou?" soundtrack

It was the third film to win.

2003: Norah Jones — "Come Away with Me"

Norah Jones won this award with her debut studio album.

2004: OutKast — "Speakerboxxx/The Love Below"

OutKast is an American hip-hop duo consisting of Andre 3000 and Big Boi.

2005: Ray Charles & Various Artists — "Genius Loves Company"

This same year, Jamie Foxx won the best actor Oscar for playing Ray Charles in the biopic "Ray."

2006: U2 — "How to Dismantle an Atomic Bomb"

This was U2's second win in this category.

2007: The Chicks — "Taking the Long Way"

The Chicks have won a total of 12 Grammys, including five in 2007 when they won this award.

2008: Herbie Hancock — "River: The Joni Letters"

This album is only the second jazz album to win this award and is a tribute album of cover songs written by Joni Mitchell.

2009: Robert Plant and Alison Krauss — "Raising Sand"

Robert Plant was previously the lead singer of Led Zeppelin, who were never nominated for album of the year.

2010: Taylor Swift — "Fearless"

Taylor Swift became the youngest artist to ever win album of the year. This record has since been broken by Billie Eilish.

2011: Arcade Fire — "The Suburbs"

Arcade Fire beat Eminem, Katy Perry, Lady Gaga, and Lady A to win this award.

2012: Adele — "21"

This was Adele's first Grammy win for album of the year.

2013: Mumford & Sons — "Babel"

Mumford & Sons beat Frank Ocean's "Channel Orange" to win this award.

2014: Daft Punk — "Random Access Memories"

Daft Punk won five Grammy awards this year.

2015: Beck — "Morning Phase"

Beck beat Beyonce, Sam Smith, Pharrell Williams, and Ed Sheeran.

2016: Taylor Swift — "1989"

Taylor Swift won her second album of the year award this year. She was the youngest person ever to win two.

2017: Adele — "25"

Adele matched Taylor Swift's two wins (at this point) in this category with her own second win, following her first in 2012.

2018: Bruno Mars — "24K Magic"

Bruno Mars has won 15 Grammys, six of which came in 2018.

2019: Kacey Musgraves — "Golden Hour"

This was the first year that the Grammys expanded this category to eight nominees. Musgraves beat Post Malone, Brandi Carlile, Janelle Monáe, H.E.R, Cardi B, Drake, and the "Black Panther" soundtrack.

2020: Billie Eilish — "When We Fall Asleep, Where Do We Go?"

Billie Eilish became the youngest-ever winner of this award at age 18, beating Swift's previous record of 20 years old.

2021: Taylor Swift — "Folklore"

At the time, she became the only woman to hold three album of the year wins, and only the fourth person to ever hold the distinction. Other artists who have won album of the year three times are Stevie Wonder, Frank Sinatra, and Paul Simon.

Swift broke that record in 2024 when she won album of the year for her 10th studio album "Midnights."

2022: Jon Batiste — "We Are"

In 2022, Jon Batiste became the first Black artist since 2008 to win album of the year. Only 10 other Black artists have won album of the year since the award show's inception.

Batiste beat artists like Justin Bieber, Olivia Rodrigo, Taylor Swift, and Doja Cat. He was the most-nominated artist of the night with 11 nods. 

2023: Harry Styles — "Harry's House"

In 2023, Harry Styles won the award for his critically acclaimed album "Harry's House," beating out artists like Beyoncé, Adele, Bad Bunny, Kendrick Lamar, and Coldplay for album of the year.

"There's no such thing as best in music," Styles said while accepting the award. "I don't think any of us sit in studios thinking about what is going to get us one of these. This is so, so kind."

2024: Taylor Swift — "Midnights"

Taylor Swift made history when she took home the top award for album of the year at the Grammys in 2024 for her 10th studio album, "Midnights."

Swift, who was previously tied with Stevie Wonder, Frank Sinatra, and Paul Simon for most album of the year wins, is now the first and only person to have won the award four times.

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

Hello! This is Lisa Ryan, an executive editor at BI. I'm normally behind the scenes of this newsletter, but today I'm filling in for Dan DeFrancesco. (Don't worry — he'll be back next week.)

This just in: Dell is "retiring" hybrid work and calling workers back to the office. Read the memo that CEO Michael Dell sent staff this morning, exclusively obtained by BI.

In today's big story, we're looking at the tragic American Airlines crash over DC and why aviation experts have been ringing the alarm for years.

What's on deck

Markets: These agencies are policing the wild west of crypto during the Trump era.

Tech: Mark Zuckerberg told Meta employees to get ready for an intense 2025.

Business: Microsoft has begun its performance-based job cuts.

If this was forwarded to you, sign up here.

The big story

Near-miss warnings

Wednesday's fatal aircraft collision over Washington, DC, is a nightmare scenario that aviation experts have been warning about.

As BI's senior aviation reporter Taylor Rains writes, pilots and aviation workers have been warning for years about the growing risk of a fatal midair collision.

"Our whole air traffic control system has been blinking red, screaming at us that we've got it overloaded," said Brian Alexander, a military helicopter pilot and partner at an aviation accident firm.

Taylor's report comes in the wake of the tragic collision between an American Airlines flight and a military helicopter on the jet's final approach into Ronald Reagan Washington National Airport. Sixty-seven people are presumed dead in what became the first complete-loss US airline crash in 15 years.

Alexander cited the "intense inadequacy" of staffing and overwork facing air-traffic controllers as major problems at airports across the US. Another aviation expert, Anthony Brickhouse, said increased flight congestion has also become a significant safety risk.

The US has been battling dangerously close near-misses for years, Taylor writes. Back in 2023, the Federal Aviation Agency created a safety review committee to address the issue. They recommended increased staffing, added oversight funding, and investing in airport technology.

But Brickhouse told Taylor that not enough changes have been made to prevent these close calls. And Wednesday night's crash has renewed anxiety about air-traffic control staffing and procedures at US airports.

The investigation into the tragic crash is ongoing. Here's what to know:

There were no survivors from the collision. Three Army crewmembers aboard the Black Hawk were from the 12th Aviation Battalion in Virginia. A spokesperson for US Figure Skating told BI that "several members" of the organization were aboard.

The crash occurred in congested airspace. The DC area's Reagan Airport has the country's busiest runway, with over 800 takeoffs and landings daily. Military helicopters often fly low over the nearby Potomac River.

Investigators recovered the black boxes from the passenger jet. "The recorders are at the NTSB labs for evaluation," an NTSB spokesperson told BI.

Without citing evidence, President Trump criticized FAA DEI efforts. In a press conference, Trump said he didn't know what caused the crash before laying out a series of diversity initiatives that he suggested could have contributed to the incident.

News brief

Top headlines

• Trump confirms his new tariffs are coming this weekend. Here's where all of his trade plans stand — and how they'll impact Americans.
• Google offers voluntary exit for staff in Pixel and Android group.
• Churned customers, incriminating texts, and a CEO's involvement: The latest claims from Yipit in its legal fight with rival M Science.
• What Silicon Valley really thinks of DeepSeek, TikTok, and Trump.
• Solar is likely to be the fastest-growing energy source this year, even as Trump promises a fossil fuel bonanza.
• Plane crashes can cause upticks in flight anxiety. Here's how to manage it.

3 things in markets

1. With Gensler out, who's policing crypto? The SEC bid goodbye to Biden appointee Gary Gensler, who many crypto insiders felt was too harsh on their industry. Digital-asset enthusiasts are hoping for clearer guidelines in the crypto-friendly Trump era, and these eight government agencies are likely to be the main crypto cops.

2. An unloved stock sector is waiting in the wings. Healthcare stocks took a hit late last year as investors fretted over the impact of RFK Jr.'s nomination to be health secretary. But those fears were likely overblown, strategists at Janus Henderson, Citi, and State Street said, and the sector's recent sell-off may have created a buying opportunity, with big gains on the horizon.

3. Blackstone COO addresses DeepSeek concerns. During a Q4 earning call, Jon Gray said the firm is keeping a close watch on the threat DeepSeek could pose to Blackstone's multibillion-dollar bet on AI infrastructure. The firm is a leading investor in data centers, having touted more than $100 billion. Gray added that Blackstone is particularly interested about what it will mean for demand.

3 things in tech

1. "Buckle up" for an "intense" year, Mark Zuckerberg tells employees. At a company all-hands meeting, the Meta CEO made it clear he's embracing tech's old motto of moving fast. In a recording of the meeting obtained by BI, Zuckerberg said AI would be top of mind this year and that DeepSeek's recent shake up would benefit Meta's goals. He also reflected on one of the company's big missteps in social media: a slow start against TikTok.

2. Missed China and iPhone targets take a bite out of Apple's record Q1 revenue. The tech giant scored $124.3 billion in revenue, narrowly beating the $124.1 billion estimate. However, China and iPhone sales missed their targets. During the earnings call, CEO Tim Cook addressed DeepSeek and mentioned Apple is pursuing a hybrid AI model that he says will serve the company well.

3. When ChatGPT gets replaced by AI. OpenAI said this week that Chinese competitor DeepSeek may have used its models "inappropriately." Yet OpenAI has also been accused of inappropriately using other people's content to train its models. DeepSeek might just be OpenAI's karmic repayment, writes BI's Ali Barr.

3 things in business

1. Meet the millionaire boomers next door. Four older Americans told BI how they retired comfortably, balancing their seven-figure net worths with some frugal habits. Some wish they'd worked less and enjoyed life a little more.

2. The next big thing in social media? Private networks. Alex Hofmann, CEO of the social-media conglomerate 9count, is betting on a new wave of private social networks that prioritize friends over media. Social platforms have become awash with influencers, brands and ads competing for attention, he said, but users want to connect with their friends and meet IRL.

3. Microsoft's performance-based job cuts have begun. Termination letters viewed by BI show workers impacted by Microsoft's performance cuts will lose their health benefits immediately. Ex-employees also say they won't receive severance. Read an excerpt from the termination letter Microsoft sent to affected employees.

In other news

• I asked DeepSeek and ChatGPT for financial advice on investing and retirement. Here's how the two rival chatbots stack up.
• A 'Trump tariff fee': Small businesses worry about raising prices in a new era for US trade.
• Social-shopping startups are raking in funding amid TikTok ban.
• UPS plunged after saying it'll deliver fewer Amazon packages. Its CEO says it's about 'taking control of our destiny.'
• World Cup Champion-turned-investor Alex Morgan sees a VC wave coming to women's sports. Here's how she thinks Silicon Valley will shape the future of athletics.
• New CEO of Douglas Elliman has a plan to right shaken real estate brokerage.

• Included Health filed to go public for a 2022 IPO that never happened. Now, it's private, profitable, and bigger than before.

  ---

What's happening today

• Samsung, ExxonMobil, and Chevron report earnings.

• Spirit AeroSystems stockholders vote on potential acquisition by Boeing.

  ---

The Insider Today team: Lisa Ryan, executive editor, 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.