Air France-KLM chief Jean-Marc Janaillac has announced his resignation after French staff at the strike-hit airline rejected a new pay deal."I accept the consequences of this vote and will tender my resignation to the boards of Air France and Air France-KLM in coming days," he said.In a ballot, 55% of the French employees rejected the deal.Air France-KLM - one of Europe's biggest airlines - has seen a series of strikes in recent weeks.The industrial action has cost the Franco-Dutch alliance millions of euros.In the ballot, company employees rejected a 7% pay rise over the next four years. They have been demanding a 5.1% increase in 2018 instead - in a dispute that began in February."This is an enormous mess that will only put a smile on the faces of our competitors," Mr Janaillac told a news conference.He said he hoped his departure would spark "a more acute collective awareness" before leaving without taking questions.The 65-year-old chief executive, who had been in the job for less than two years, earlier promised to quit if the pay deal was rejected.He had been trying to cut costs at the company, amid rising competition from low-cost airlines and Gulf national carriers.He will officially resign next Wednesday, Air France-KLM said.Meanwhile, the company's unions said further strikes would be staged in the coming days.Air France-KLM has already downgraded its profit and growth expectations for 2018. Air France and KLM merged in 2004. They transport tens of millions of passengers around the world every year.Labour reforms launched by French President Emmanuel Macron have also led to strikes by employees of the state-owned SNCF rail company.British Airways and Lufthansa have already undergone deep cost-cutting in recent years, and some analysts say Air France has lagged behind."There is inevitably some pain for staff when structural changes are made, but once that is dealt with, you're left with a much healthier company," said aviation consultant John Strickland. "That has been proved in the cases of the turnarounds achieved by Iberia and British Airways."

SAN FRANCISCO -- Facebook says it is under antitrust investigation by the Federal Trade Commission. The company made the announcement just hours after the agency slapped it with a record $5 billion fine and new oversight on its privacy practices. Facebook said Wednesday that it was informed of the FTC's antitrust investigation in June. On Tuesday, the Department of Justice also announced a broad antitrust probe of technology companies. Though that agency didn't name any companies, broad antitrust concerns have long swirled around Apple, Amazon, Facebook and Google. Facebook also faces various probes in Canada and Europe as regulators seek to crack down on the growing power of these U.S. technology companies. Following on Facebook's public disclosure, the FTC confirmed the antitrust probe, but would not give details such as how long the probe has been underway. Facebook's business, so far, seems unharmed. On Wednesday, the company reported stronger-than-expected revenue but lower earnings for the second quarter. The results were boosted by higher advertising revenue and an ever-growing user base, though net income declined due to one-time expenses — mainly the FTC fine. It said it earned $2.6 billion, or 91 cents per share, in the April-June period. That's down 49% from $5.1 billion, or $1.74 per share, in the same period a year earlier. Adjusted earnings were $1.99 per share. Analysts, on average, were expecting adjusted earnings of $1.90 per share, according to a poll by Zacks. Facebook booked $2 billion in one-time expenses to pay for the remainder of the FTC fine after setting aside $3 billion in the first quarter. The $5 billion fine, announced Wednesday morning, stems from the FTC's investigation into Facebook's privacy violations following the Cambridge Analytica scandal. Revenue rose 28% to $16.9 billion from $13.2 billion. Analysts were expecting $16.5 billion according to a poll by FactSet. Facebook had 2.41 billion monthly active users as of June 30, an increase of 8% from a year earlier.

Amazon isn’t a company whose behavior is easy to categorize.While Amazon likes to boast about its “customer obsession,” sometimes that focus comes at a cost to the greater good. The convenience of devices like Amazon Echo smart speakers and the Ring doorbell, for instance, have introduced new costs to privacy, and the push for ever-faster shipping puts a greater burden on Amazon’s already-strained workforce.This year provided several examples in which Amazon’s biggest successes came with serious ramifications. With that in mind, let’s look back at what Amazon got right and wrong in 2019:Good: The hardware incursion continuesAmazon’s Alexa devices continued to dominate the smart speaker wars this year, both in the United States and worldwide. And its Fire TV streaming platform has surpassed Roku in active users. Now, Amazon is building on that success by expanding into new areas, including Alexa earbuds, eyeglasses, and even a voice-activated ring, while also refining its current lineup with better-sounding Echo speakers and more powerful Fire TV devices.Just as importantly, Amazon is creating a stronger ecosystem around those products. The new Echo Studio speaker, for instance, can pair with other Echo speakers to create an audio system for Fire TV devices, and a feature called Alexa Guard lets Echo speakers listen for the sound of smoke alarms or broken glass. Amazon added parental control features to Alexa as well, along with a kid-friendly Echo Dot speaker. Heading into 2020, no other company’s vision for voice control is quite as cohesive.Bad: Ring’s privacy non-responseA few months ago, Amazon announced a bunch of new privacy features for Alexa in response to customers’ growing unease over smart speakers. Users can now auto-delete recordings on a rolling three-month or 18-month basis, and they can also ask Alexa to immediately delete anything they’ve said on a given day. “We’re investing in privacy across the board,” explained Dave Limp, Amazon’s head of hardware and services.Good: Getting serious with groceriesAmazon gave grocery stores more reasons to be nervous this year. In April, the company announced price cuts on hundreds of items at Whole Foods, with a major focus on produce, and expanded its weekly grocery deals program for Prime members. And in October, it expanded its free grocery delivery program to more than 20 major metro areas, many of which had previously required a $15 per month Amazon Fresh subscription.While Amazon’s moves could prompt more antitrust scrutiny–more on that later–it also may have encouraged innovation from rivals. As Bloomberg reported this month, other grocery chains are investing in new technology such as mobile checkout and automated delivery warehouses in hopes of staying a step ahead.Bad: Retail’s failure to regulateIn August, a Wall Street Journal investigation by Alexandra Berzon, Shane Shifflett, and Justin Schreck turned up thousands of Amazon Marketplace listings for products that were either mislabeled, declared unsafe, or banned by federal regulators. A separate report by CNBC’s Annie Palmer in October turned up widespread complaints about merchants selling expired food. And our own Glenn Fleishman reported on dangerous low-cost laser cutters available from Marketplace sellers—some of which Amazon removed after we brought them to its attention.As the WSJ argued, this is yet another example of a major tech company failing to police its platform, echoing how Google, Twitter, and Facebook have struggled to curb misinformation. It may already be having real-world ramifications: Last month, Nike stopped selling products directly from Amazon, reportedly in part because the brand grew tired of competing with counterfeit and unlicensed third-party listings.Good: Burying the hatchet with YouTubeAfter Google and Amazon declared war on one another’s streaming platforms in 2017, the companies found their way to a truce this year. Google has released official YouTube and YouTube TV apps on Amazon’s Fire TV devices, and a YouTube Kids app is also on the way. Amazon, meanwhile, has brought Prime Video support to Chromecast and Android TV devices, and has allowed Chromecast and certain Nest products into its retail store.The cold war continues in some areas. You won’t find Google’s smart speakers on Amazon’s website, for instance, and other Google apps such as Google Photos and YouTube Music remain unavailable on Fire TV devices. Still, at least the companies realized that withholding their respective video services from one another’s platforms wasn’t beneficial for anyone.Bad: Antitrust probes galoreLike other major tech firms, Amazon has become a target of antitrust probes this year, both in the United States and abroad. The Federal Trade Commission is reportedly examining whether Amazon unfairly favors its own products over those of third-party merchants on its site, and may have expanded its probe to Amazon’s wildly profitable AWS cloud computing business. The European Union, meanwhile, has announced its own wide-ranging antitrust investigation, looking at whether Amazon is harvesting marketplace seller data for an unfair advantage, among other things. That investigation comes in spite of a settlement with Germany’s antitrust authority over Amazon’s terms of service for third-party sellers.It’s still early days for these probes, and Amazon may not have been able to avert the broader mistrust of tech giants that led to this point. But the company’s recent history of pushing around brands and upending resale markets without notice probably hasn’t helped.Good: Prime video successesAmazon Prime Video has always been an also-ran in the TV streaming wars, with a decent selection of movies but few showstopping originals. This year, however, Amazon’s series are starting to get some buzz. The Marvelous Mrs. Maisel and Fleabag both cleaned up at the Emmys, while The Boys and season 4 of The Expanse (the latter saved from cancellation on basic cable) have earned critical acclaim. Turns out Amazon might not have to wait for that Lord of the Rings prequel to put its original programming on the map.Bad: The HQ2 collapseAfter a year-long contest in which city and state officials dangled offers of special tax breaks and other incentives, Amazon announced in late 2018 that it had selected New York City and Arlington, Virginia for its second headquarters. The announcement quickly triggered a backlash in New York, as protestors argued that the megadeal would further strain the city’s education, transportation, and housing systems for little in return. With public support collapsing, Amazon abandoned its New York plan in February, giving up about $3 billion in tax breaks from the city and state (though it is now leasing office space on a much smaller scale).As Recode’s Jason Del Rey argued, one could imagine an alternate outcome in which Amazon made compromises to satisfy its critics, but that’s not really the company’s nature. The alternative, however, was embarrassment for Amazon and the elected officials that prostrated themselves to get a deal done.Good: New shipping perksIf you’ve noticed more Amazon orders arriving earlier this year, it’s no coincidence. In April, Amazon began expanding the number of products it ships with one-day delivery for Prime members, including many products that used to only ship as add-ons to pricier orders. The company now says it offers free one-day shipping in more than 10 million products.Amazon also started offering in-garage delivery for customers with smart garage door openers, which is slightly less creepy than letting deliveries in through the front door when you’re not home.Bad: Stretching workers to the limitWhile faster free shipping might be a boon for Amazon’s customers, it may also put a heavy burden on workers who in some cases are already at a breaking point. As BuzzFeed and ProPublica reported this year, Amazon’s relentless demands have prompted some delivery contractors to sacrifice safety, pressuring drivers to skip meals, avoid breaks, and ignore speed limits. Amazon cut ties with the offending contractors after those reports emerged, but drivers say safety problems still exist.The unrelenting pace at Amazon’s warehouses doesn’t sound any better. Last month, The Atlantic reported that serious injury rates at one warehouse that were four times higher than the industry average. The story also documented efforts by some managers to avoid having medical issues recorded or reported. Amazon, however, insists that nothing is wrong, and has even claimed that union groups are exploiting workers’ horror stories to extract higher membership dues. In other words, don’t expect much in the way of systemic change until automation takes humans out of the equation entirely.

A recent report revealed Amazon’s AI recruiting technology developed a bias against women because it was trained predominantly on men’s résumés. Although Amazon shut the project down, this kind of mechanized sexism is common and growing – and the problem isn’t limited to AI mishaps.Facebook allows the targeting of job ads by gender, resulting in discrimination in online job advertisements for traditionally male-dominated jobs from construction to policing. The practice has long been illegal in traditional print media – but Facebook’s targeting tools encourage it. Not only can this affect whether women and non-binary people can see ads; it also affects male job-seekers who are older and therefore viewed as less desirable by many employers. Facebook has come under fire for illegal advertising practices in the past: notably, it scrapped thousands of microtargeting categories after a 2016 ProPublica report showed how it allowed racial discrimination in housing ads.The platform has repeatedly refused to take responsibility for what people do on it, echoing the behavior of other Silicon Valley companies. Gendered and racialized harassment online goes largely unchecked. Likewise, Google’s YouTube has come under fire for algorithms that appear to push radicalizing far-right content on to casual viewers, while Google itself has faced accusations that its image search and autocomplete features rely on and strengthen racist and sexist stereotypes.As online platforms strip away civil rights protections intended to correct biases in earlier forms of communication, it serves as an example of the dangerous tendency of our current, and supposedly progressive, technologies to recreate discriminatory patterns of the past. Indeed, these problems fit a pattern in the long trajectory of the history of technology.Today, jobs in computing, if advertised on Facebook, would probably be targeted to men because these jobs are located in an already male-dominated field. In the early days of electronic computing, however, the work was strongly associated with women. It was feminized because it was seen as deskilled and unimportant. This quickly began to change as computers became indispensable in all areas of government and industry. Once it became clear that those who knew how to use them would have great power and influence, female programmers lost out despite having all the requisite skills. Britain’s computerization is a cautionary tale: women were repeatedly and progressively denied promotions or boxed out of their jobs, particularly when they married or had children. When they left, they were replaced by men. This created disastrous labor shortages that ultimately forced Britain’s decline as a computing superpower.Women continued to program, but they had to do it without the support of major institutions. One example was the entrepreneur Stephanie “Steve” Shirley, who used a masculine nickname to sidestep sexism. Shirley started a freelance programming company with an explicitly feminist business model after finding herself unable to advance in government and industry. She employed hundreds of other women who had similarly had to leave the workforce. Shirley gave these women an opportunity to use their skills in the service of the nation’s economy by giving them the option to work from home, filling some of the gaps left by this exodus of trained computer professionals from full-time computing work.Shirley’s business, built on women’s labor and expertise, went on to become a multimillion-dollar corporation that did mission-critical programming for government and private industry. As the government scrambled for male computing talent, for instance, a team of her female programmers, led by Ann Moffatt, programmed the black box for the Concorde jet. As Shirley’s business flourished, many other companies and even the British government itself suffered for lack of programming talent.The irony is that this shortage had been intentionally engineered by the refusal to continue to employ female technologists in these newly prestigious jobs. Throughout history, when jobs are seen as more important, or are better paid, women are squeezed out – hence the need for protective legislation that ensures equality of opportunity in hiring and job advertisements.In computing today, a field that claims to value diversity, engineers at Facebook and other companies are building tools that roll back the advances of women in the workforce, as the industry undoes the civil rights protections enacted to ensure that what happened in early computing does not happen again.When industries ignore their pasts, they tend not only to repeat previous mistakes, but also to worsen current problems. Silicon Valley’s gender problems are well known, and despite companies’ claims that they are trying to address the problem, progress has been slow and uneven. This is not surprising when we consider the context. Although the industry is facing a reckoning today, for decades the stories that we told about computing technology focused on inexorable success, rather than taking seriously the possibility that our new technologies were failing us. High technology became virtually synonymous with progress and the greater application of computing to all manner of social problems was seen as a good in and of itself. As a result, we are largely blind to the errors of the past. We fail to see the problems in our present and the reasons behind them because we are too accustomed to seeing computing as a success story.The refusal to talk about computing’s failures in the past has not served us, or present-day computing, well. Rather, it has hidden problems that have plagued the field since its inception. Facebook’s discriminatory practices towards female users in everything from job advertisements to harassment can be traced back to its predecessor, the beta site set up by Mark Zuckerberg while at Harvard that stole female undergrads’ pictures from internal Harvard servers. The site, known as Facemash, objectified the women for an audience invited to rate their relative attractiveness. When we consider Facebook’s current problems in this light, they not only seem less surprising but also potentially more solvable.Lessons like this are critical today because high technology has an outsize effect on every aspect of our daily lives, and it is also, in many ways, steadily moving us back towards a past that we thought we had forgotten. Much of the anti-racist and anti-sexist legislation of the 20th century has been invisibly rolled back by tech infrastructures that invite users to see their online actions as unmoored from real life – whether in the realm of hate speech or job advertisements.Strong representation of women in the labor market is key, historically and today, for women to be able to assert their rights in all aspects of their lives. Companies like Facebook cannot be allowed to divide and conquer by gender, race, sexuality, age, disability, or any other number of categories people have fought to protect by law as deserving of equal rights.Marie Hicks is an associate professor at the Illinois Institute of Technology in Chicago, Illinois, and a fellow at the National Humanities Center. Hicks is the author of the book Programmed Inequality: How Britain Discarded Women Technologists and Lost Its Edge in Computing (MIT Press, 2017). Read more at marhicks.com Topics Technology Gender Facebook Social networking Google YouTube Work & careers features

PARIS — In the first year of his presidency, Emmanuel Macron has pushed business-friendly labor laws through Parliament, made it easier for companies to hire and fire, cut the wealth tax and decentralized collective bargaining. Through it all, France’s most militant unions have resisted.His changes, which set out to reshape the way France’s economy and society work, are now facing increasing pushback from labor groups. For weeks, unions have staged a series of strikes to oppose efforts to make the nation’s main railway system, the SNCF, more competitive. And unions representing Air France-KLM staff on Monday called for new strikes after rejecting a pay proposal.The discontent is emerging as a test of his ability to stick with pledges to enhance France’s economic competitiveness and global leadership, which helped usher him to an electoral victory last May.While Mr. Macron’s economic changes do not take aim at the nation’s flagship air carrier, his administration has inserted itself directly into the fight, warning labor leaders that they risked driving Air France to the brink of calamity.France’s finance minister, Bruno Le Maire, warned that the company might “disappear” if unions persisted in their demands for an immediate 5 percent wage increase and continued rolling strikes that have already affected tens of thousands of fliers worldwide. The French government, which owns a minority stake in Air France, would not ride to the rescue with a taxpayer bailout if the airline faltered, Mr. Le Maire said.The standoff, which has already cost the airline an estimated 300 million euros, or $360 million, in lost revenue, prompted the abrupt resignation of the airline’s chief executive. Shares of the company were down 13 percent on Monday.“I am not taking the money of the French and putting it in a company that isn’t at the required competitive level,” Mr. Le Maire said.The battle is an outgrowth of Mr. Macron’s effort to remake the French economy.He has rammed a series of controversial changes to France’s notoriously rigid labor laws through a Parliament stacked with members of his En Marche party, starting with a measure this year to make it easier for private companies to fire workers. Mr. Macron is also tilting at the unemployment and pension systems with controversial changes to reduce costs.In the midst of his drive, he is also challenging France’s most time-tested institutions. In March, he began negotiations for an overhaul of the heavily subsidized, debt-laden French rail system, targeting jobs-for-life schemes and benefits that are among the most generous of any profession in France in a bid to open the system to competition by 2020.Mr. Macron’s moves have been cheered by businesses and investors. It has encouraged drawn companies like Facebook and Amazon to step up their presence in France.But they have also sparked fear and anger among swaths of French society. Many workers worry that the financing of the country’s cherished safety net will be plucked away and transferred to business, for the profit of shareholders.Even some analysts warn that the government may be going too far, by shifting the balance of power toward employers and greatly eroding the power of labor. The unions have been spoiling for a fight.In many ways, that has been Mr. Macron’s point. Although only around 8 percent of the nation’s workers are unionized, organized labor has long held outsize clout at the negotiating table with employers. In France, even small changes tend to agitate unions, which have historically sought to secure workplace protections through protests and strikes.Before pushing through changes to the labor laws, Mr. Macron held more than 50 meetings with unions shortly after his election in an effort to get them onboard with his program.The General Confederation of Labor, known as the C.G.T., has largely resisted, seeing an effort to repeal hard-won labor rights. The union has been at the forefront of mobilizing actions that in recent weeks have led hundreds of thousands of people into the streets, and encouraged regular strikes at the nation’s railway system that are scheduled to last until July.The more moderate French Democratic Confederation of Labor, France’s largest union after recently overtaking the C.G.T. in membership, has pushed for a more flexible approach as the forces of globalization change the competitive landscape.At Air France, the government pushed back against labor groups over the weekend after the chief executive, Jean-Marc Janaillac, resigned abruptly on Friday. Mr. Janaillac had failed to win workers over in a contentious internal referendum that proposed a 7 percent pay increase for pilots and staff over four years.Air France’s hard-line pilots’ union had demanded an immediate 5 percent raise to make up for wages that have been frozen for nearly five years. The company has recorded record profits thanks to lower oil prices since 2016, prompting the union to insist that Air France could afford the pay increase.The tensions were at least a far cry from a clash between employees and managers in 2015, when a mob of angry workers stormed a meeting on job cuts and ripped the shirts off two top executives, who escaped over a chain-link fence for safety.Still, it has set up a dangerous game of brinkmanship between unions and the French government, which has hinted that it is willing to let Air France go under.“If it doesn’t make the necessary efforts to be at the same competitive level of Lufthansa and other major airlines, it will disappear,” Mr. Le Maire said on the French television station BFM on Sunday. He added that the union’s salary demands were “unjustified” and urged employees to show “responsibility.”Such talk is reminiscent of Mr. Macron’s broader approach to overhauling the economy. Some analysts have criticized the way he has pushed through changes to the labor laws, most of which have been done by the equivalent of executive order, raising questions about how democratic — or not — his methods have been.One year into his presidency, Mr. Macron is routinely referred to in the French media as Jupiter or Napoleon Bonaparte, when he is not being compared to French kings. This weekend, thousands of demonstrators amassed in Paris to express anger at what they called a “soft dictatorship,” while brandishing a portrait of King Louis XVI with Mr. Macron’s face Photoshopped in.“Emmanuel Macron is walking a fine line between the rehabilitation of a certain presidential authority and authoritarianism,” Jean-Claude Monod, a specialist in political philosophy, said in an interview published Monday in the French daily Le Monde. “One has the impression of a deafness in front of forms of protest or political experimentations, of a will to use force for his reforms.”

A group of people carrying a white nationalist flag were caught on camera Saturday attempting to record a video in front of the Emmett Till memorial in Sumner, Mississippi.Patrick Weems, executive director of the Emmett Till Memorial Commission, told NBC News that the group was captured on camera by a new surveillance system that was updated when the bulletproof memorial was dedicated on Oct. 19."This is the first incident we’ve seen of what appears to be white nationalists making a propaganda video," Weems said.One man can be heard in the video identifying the sign as a monument representing the "civil rights movement for blacks.""What we want to know is, where are all of the white people?" he continued.The Morning RundownGet a head start on the morning's top stories.In another clip, the group can be seen scrambling for their cars after sirens go off, a newly added security feature.A clip of the video was posted to the Sumner Courthouse and Emmett Till Interpretive Center Facebook page on Saturday.Since the incident, the site has been monitored by the Tallahatchie County Sheriff's Office.The group was carrying a white flag with a black St. Andrews cross, a symbol authorities said were connected to a neo-Confederate group called the League of the South in Alabama, according to Weems.Southern Poverty Law Center identifies the League of the South as a hate group that has "increasingly embraced violence, criticized perceived Jewish power and warned black people that they would be defeated in a future race war."Emmett Till was 14 years old when he was abducted, tortured and brutally murdered by two white men in 1955 after the teen was accused of whistling at a white woman. Till was visiting family in the area when he was kidnapped and then found dead days later in the Tallahatchie River.Signs memorializing Till have been vandalized and shot at multiple times since the first marker was put up in 2007, according to the commission. A bulletproof sign, the fourth Till memorial in the area, was dedicated on Oct. 19, to replace a sign that had been "riddled with 20 bullet holes."The memorial commission launched the Emmett Till Memory Project the same day, an app that uses GPS markers at historic sites to tell the story of Emmett Till. The landowner who owned the farm by the river where Till's body was found has donated the land, where the memorial commission hopes to raise funds to create another memorial site.Weems told NBC News that the organization was proud to work with the community to keep the legacy of Emmett Till alive."We want to respond to this hate speech by continuing to do this work."

Many facial recognition technology systems misidentify people of color at a higher rate than white people, according to a federal study released Thursday.The research from the National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST), a federal agency within the Department of Commerce, comes amid pushback from lawmakers and civil rights groups to the software which scans faces to quickly identify individuals.After reviewing 189 pieces of software from 99 developers, which NIST identified as a majority of the industry, the researchers found that in one-to-one matching, which is normally used for verification, Asian and African American people were up to 100 times more likely to be misidentified than white men.In one-to-many matching, used by law enforcement to identify people of interest, faces of African American women returned more false positives than other groups.“In a one-to-one search, a false negative might be merely an inconvenience — you can’t get into your phone, but the issue can usually be remediated by a second attempt,” Patrick Grother, a NIST computer scientist and the report’s primary author, said in a statement.“But a false positive in a one-to-many search puts an incorrect match on a list of candidates that warrant further scrutiny.”Grother concluded that NIST found “empirical evidence” that the majority of facial recognition systems have “demographic differentials” that can worsen their accuracy based on a person’s age, gender or race.The federal investigators stressed that there was a wide range of accuracy levels between different software, noting some algorithms resulted in very few errors.They also found that software developed in Asian countries tended to perform better on Asian faces. Although the research did not focus on a casual link, that result suggests that more diverse databases of individuals could yield better results for facial recognition.“These results are an encouraging sign that more diverse training data may produce more equitable outcomes, should it be possible for developers to use such data,” Grother said.The study's results could significantly change the course of the nascent technology, which has been receiving increasing scrutiny.Several other studies have found similar bias in the technology and some cities have banned its use by law enforcement.Lawmakers have introduced bills to limit its use by police or in public housing, but as of now, there is no federal law dictating when, how, where or why facial recognition technology can be used.

36氪独家获悉，在腾讯成为第二大股东之后，弹幕视频网站bilibili又于近期获得阿里投资。一名接近交易的重要人士对36氪确认，这项投资已完成。另一名知情人士对36氪称，交易已完成，正如10月初腾讯入股B站一样，阿里这次也是增资扩股。B站回应称：未经官方公告确认的传闻均不属实。据知情人士透露，由腾讯、百度和红杉资本支持的中国短视频应用快手正在以250亿美元的估值就筹资进行洽谈。这将高于此前一轮融资中180亿美元的估值。此次融资是中国短视频应用之间数十亿美元军备竞赛的最新一枪。快手正在与字节跳动旗下的抖音等应用程序展开竞争。字节跳动刚刚从软银等投资者那里融资30亿美元，估值750亿美元。（The Information）据“独角兽早知道”，同程艺龙将于下周五开始簿记，预计11月16日正式挂牌上市。同程艺龙2019年预期动态市盈率在20~25倍左右，此次上市的联席保荐人为摩根士丹利、摩根大通及招银国际。（独角兽早知道）36氪讯，荣耀手机今日正式发布荣耀Magic 2，主要配置包括麒麟980、6.39英寸滑盖AMOLED全面屏、屏内指纹识别、“智慧生命体”YOYO、后置三摄像头、40W快充等。6GB+128GB版本为3799元，8GB+128GB版本为4299元，8GB+256GB版本为4799元，3D感光版8GB+512GB为5799元。拼多多：近期并未上线过“医药健康馆”36氪讯，针对有媒体报道称拼多多试水医药电商、上线“医药健康馆”，拼多多方面回应称：1.拼多多近期并未上线过“医药健康馆”；2.此前一直在线的健康频道由第三方“医药流通领域持牌商家”依法依规销售保健品和OTC药品，商家入驻标准及平台治理规则与其他电商平台并无二致。据外媒报道，由于第三季度营收低于预期，且用户增长乏力，多家投资银行纷纷下调Facebook目标股价。其中，摩根士丹利下调至170美元，Monness Crespi Hardt下调至190美元，JMP下调至176美元，花旗下调至175美元，野村证券下调至161美元，KeyBanc下调至195美元。雅虎财经数据显示，当前48位分析师给予Facebook的平均目标股价为206.62美元。（腾讯科技）据CNBC报道，Facebook创始人马克·扎克伯格在公司财报电话会议上阐述了FB的未来愿景，称故事、消息和视频将推动公司未来的增长。扎克伯格表示，FB将在更多产品上推出故事功能，他认为故事蕴藏的商机将大于消息流。FB首席运营官谢乐尔·桑德伯格表示，公司需要开发相关工具，培训广告客户如何更好地开发故事广告产品。（中证报）FF与一家金融机构达成协议，通过公司设备进行担保，以期获得贷款支持。与此同时，FF援引上述条款——“FF如果找到第三方金融机构愿意做债权投资，那么恒大必须无条件解除知识产权以及所有设备的资产保全”，正式向恒大要求履行其无条件解除设备质押的合同义务，但恒大至今没有回复。（腾讯棱镜）36氪讯，北京汽车发布公告称与北汽集团、北汽新能源、北汽鹏龙及华夏出行订立了出资协议，将分别出资5,000万元、13,000万元、5,000万元、5,000万元、5,000万元，联合设立北汽IT公司，以布局信息化业务。根据出资协议，北汽IT公司的总注册资本为33,000万元人民币。10月最后一周，美国科技股持续下跌的态势仍未缓解。据财新数据，截至美东时间10月30日收盘，Facebook、亚马逊、谷歌、Netflix四大科技公司总市值较10月1日下跌17.5%，回到年初水平，较年内最高点蒸发超5500亿美元。（财新）近日，宜家的控股公司Interogo Holding AG斥资17亿瑞典克朗（约1.90亿美元）买入海恩斯莫里斯（H&M）集团0.6%的股份，并拥持有了后者0.3%的投票权。这是Interogo Holding AG第一次拥有快时尚公司的股份。（界面）根据Business Insider消息，苹果公司已经开始与Leap Motion谈判收购条件，收购金额在3000万美元至5000万美元之间。据了解，Apple已经多次提出要购买增强现实创业公司Leap Motion，最近一次是在2018年春季，而此次报价可能是摇摇欲坠的Leap Motion的最后机会。（品玩）中国平安计划让旗下医疗科技子公司在香港进行20亿美元IPO据知情人士透露，中国平安计划最快于明年将其医疗科技子公司在香港上市。知情人士称，向医院、保险和医药商店提供科技平台的平安医保科技可能募集大约20亿美元；公司正与潜在顾问讨论计划股份发行事宜；磋商处于初步阶段，计划细节仍可能有变。此前平安医保科技在今年2月宣布的A轮融资中，从软银愿景基金等投资者募得了11.5亿美元的资金。（彭博）阅文集团发布公告，宣布正式完成收购新丽传媒100%股权。今年8月，阅文集团与新丽传媒达成全资收购协议，根据双方所达成的最终协议，新丽传媒既有的管理团队将会继续负责电视剧、网络剧和电影制作业务，并有权对原创内容进行挑选，包括从阅文以外的平台选取素材。此次收购将帮助阅文完善IP业务结构，进一步深入IP价值链，将自身内容实力向下游延展。（腾讯科技）信达生物今日登陆港交所，上市首日收涨18.60%36氪讯，信达生物今日正式登陆港交所，收盘报16.58港元，较发行价上涨18.6%，总市值达到185.39亿港元。北京中飞艾维航空科技有限公司获投数千万元A+轮投资，此次融资由中经合鲁信领投。截止到目前，中飞艾维无人机巡线作业服务已覆盖全国20多个省市，市场覆盖范围第一。（美通社）据iThome.com.tw报道，作为与AI for Social Good计划中的一部分，谷歌与美国国家海洋和大气管理局的太平洋群岛渔业科学中心合作，开发了一系列演算法来辨识水下座头鲸的声音，以进一步得知这些鲸鱼现身的时间和位置，协助减轻他们所面临的威胁。（新浪科技）香港金融管理局今日宣布，推出区块链贸易融资技术平台“贸易联动”，并开展跨境区块链贸易融资研究。贸易联动”由金管局推动成立，于2018年9月27日上线试运营，今日正式投入运作。该平台由香港贸易融资平台有限公司（HKTFPCL）管理及拥有，最终控股实体为香港银行同业结算有限公司。（财新）北京市人力社保局发布惠民新政，明确从今年11月15日起，将阿扎胞苷等17种抗癌药品，全部纳入北京市医保报销范围，并同时将以上药品纳入门诊特殊病报销范围。加上之前已纳入的抗癌药，共有35种国家谈判的抗癌药纳入北京市医保报销范围，进一步减轻了患者用药负担。（新华社）会议指出，要坚持“两个毫不动摇”，促进多种所有制经济共同发展，研究解决民营企业、中小企业发展中遇到的困难。围绕资本市场改革，加强制度建设，激发市场活力，促进资本市场长期健康发展。继续积极有效利用外资，维护在华外资企业合法权益。要改进作风，狠抓落实，使已出台的各项政策措施尽快发挥作用。（新华社）

增强现实公司 Magic Leap 的 CEO Rony Abovitz 曾经向投资者承诺，其 AR 眼镜在推出首年会卖出 100 万套，但后来有消息指他将这一数字更正为比较靠谱的 10 万。不过根据 The Information 最近的报道，Magic Leap 在产品推出前 6 个月内只卖出了 6000 套售价 2300 美元的 Magic Leap One AR 眼镜。6000 对比 10 万的差距是有点大，但无论如何如此低迷的销量势必会对 Magic Leap 带来资金方面的压力。不意外地，据报道 Magic Leap 正在裁员并消减开支。Magic Leap 已经从 Google、阿里巴巴和其他投资者处筹集了大约 26 亿美元风险资金。The Information 还报道称，Google（现为 Alphabet）首席执行官 Sundar Pichai 已经离开 Magic Leap 董事会，Google 高管 Jennifer Fitzpatrick 接替他的职位。另一方面，Google 已经放弃了 Daydream VR 项目，这很明显是因 VR/AR 市场逐渐变冷所致。不得不为 Magic Leap 未来的发展之路捏一把汗啊。AR magic leap Magic Leap One VR

36氪回顾2019年的新经济格局，经过数据和问卷调研，发布2019年新经济之王第三方机构榜单。包括第三方服务机构律师事务所、会计师事务所、券商，以及早期创业投资机构、创业投资机构、私募股权投资机构、企业战投和新型投行榜单。36氪从投资项目数量、投资额、项目参与度、明星项目数量等维度对创投机构综合评分，评选出2019年最具成长力的私募股权投资机构。律格资本获评中国最具成长力私募股权投资机构TOP10。律格资本是2016年设立的私募股权基金，是由数位在中国投资领域从业时间长、有丰富实战经验的专业人士发起设立。律格资本核心业务包括私募股权投资、产业投资和并购投资三大板块，在科技、教育、医疗等领域组建有专业投资团队，并成功完成对数个优质产业龙头项目的投资。截至2017年1月，律格资本已在增强现实、共享出行和社交领域等硅谷明星项目投资了数千万美元。已完成和储备的项目包括：滴滴打车、Snapchat、Airbnb、Magic Leap、Wework、Docusign等。

Enlarge this image The author of a new book, Doing Harm, argues that a pattern of gender bias in medicine means women's pain may be going undiagnosed. PhotoAlto/Michele Constantini/Getty Images hide caption toggle caption PhotoAlto/Michele Constantini/Getty Images The author of a new book, Doing Harm, argues that a pattern of gender bias in medicine means women's pain may be going undiagnosed. PhotoAlto/Michele Constantini/Getty Images When journalist Maya Dusenbery was in her 20s, she started experiencing progressive pain in her joints, which she learned was caused by rheumatoid arthritis.As she began to research her own condition, Dusenbery realized how lucky she was to have been diagnosed relatively easily. Other women with similar symptoms, she says, "experienced very long diagnostic delays and felt ... that their symptoms were not taken seriously."Dusenbery says these experiences fit into a larger pattern of gender bias in medicine. Her new book, Doing Harm, makes the case that women's symptoms are often dismissed and misdiagnosed — in part because of what she calls the "systemic and unconscious bias that's rooted ... in what doctors, regardless of their own gender, are learning in medical schools." Shots - Health News Answering Your Questions: Health 101 For Grown Women "I definitely believe that the fact that medicine has been historically and continues to be mainly run by men has been a source of these problems," she says. "The medical knowledge that we have is just skewed towards knowing more about men's bodies and the conditions that disproportionately affect them."Dusenbery is also the executive editor of Feministing, a website of writing by young feminists about social, cultural and political issues.On how women have been left out of drug trials and medical observational studies There was a lot of concern about including women in drug trials, specifically because of concerns about affecting their hypothetical fetuses. So in the '70s the FDA had a policy of prohibiting any woman of childbearing age from participating in early-stage drug trials. ...But we also see that at that time, women were also excluded from studies that were just observational studies — not just drug trials. In the '90s, when there were congressional hearings about this problem, the public learned that women had been left out of things like a big observational study looking at normal human aging that was ongoing for 20 years. It started in the '50s, and for the first 20 years women had been left out of that.On women's recent inclusion in National Institutes of Health studies [In] 1993, Congress passed a law saying that women need to be included in NIH-funded clinical research. And in the aggregate, women do make up a majority of subjects in NIH research. However, we still don't know that women are necessarily adequately represented in all areas of research, because the NIH looks at the aggregate numbers, and the outside analyses that have been done show that women are still a little bit underrepresented. Shots - Health News Clinical Trials Still Don't Reflect The Diversity Of America More importantly, even though women are usually included in most studies today, it's still not the norm to really analyze results by gender to actually see if there are differences between men and women. So experts have described this to me as an "add women and stir" approach. Women are included, but we're still not getting the knowledge we need about ways that their symptoms or responses to treatment might differ from men.On why some medicine affects men and women differently — and how that results in women receiving excessive doses of most drugsThere are a lot of factors that go into these recognized sex differences in drug metabolism and response. ... Percentage of body fat affects it. Hormones, different levels of enzymes — all of these things go into it. But really, probably the most straightforward [factor] is that, on average, men have a higher body weight than women. And yet, even that difference is not usually accounted for. We prescribe drugs based on this one-size-fits-all dosage, but that ends up meaning that, on average, women are being overdosed on most drugs.On the difference between how men and women experience heart disease Shots - Health News Hidden Heart Disease Is The Top Health Threat For U.S. Women Over the last couple of decades, there's been a recognition that for the first 35 years we were studying heart disease, we were really mostly studying it in men. And so there's been a concerted effort to go back and compare women's experiences to men's, which has led to the knowledge that women are more likely to have what are considered to be atypical symptoms. [And] the only reason they're considered "atypical" is because the norm has been this male model — so, atypical symptoms, like pain in the neck or shoulder, nausea, fatigue, lightheadedness. ...Partly as a result of those differences in symptoms — which are still not always recognized by health care providers — women (especially younger women) are more likely to be turned away when they're having a heart attack, sent home. One study found it was younger women — so women under 55 — were seven times more likely than the average patient to be sent home mid-heart attack. ... Even if they're not sent home, you see longer delays [for women] to getting [electrocardiograms] and other diagnostic testing or interventions in the ER setting.On how the subjective symptom of fatigue is dismissed in womenOne of the most common [symptoms] that really is common across ... [the autoimmune diseases] is fatigue — a really deep, deep fatigue that isn't just being sleep-deprived from staying up too late. That fatigue, comparable to pain, is this very subjective symptom that's hard to communicate to other people. And I think that women are up against this real distrust of their own reports of their symptoms. Shots - Health News Annals Of The Obvious: Women Way More Tired Than Men So conditions like autoimmune diseases that really are marked by these subjective symptoms of pain and fatigue, I think, are very easy to dismiss in women. ... Even though we do know about autoimmune diseases, during that diagnostic delay, women are often told, "You're just stressed. You're tired." And [they] have a really hard time convincing doctors that this fatigue is abnormal.On some female patients taking a male relative or spouse with them to doctors' appointments to vouch for themI found this to be one of the most disturbing things that I found in my research: how many women reported that as they were fighting to get their symptoms taken seriously, [they] just sort of sensed that what they really needed was somebody to testify to their symptoms, to testify to their sanity, and felt that bringing a partner or a father or even a son would be helpful. And then [they] found that it was [helpful], that they were treated differently when there was that man in the room who was corroborating their reports.Heidi Saman and Seth Kelley produced and edited this interview for broadcast. Bridget Bentz, Molly Seavy-Nesper and Scott Hensley adapted it for the Web.

WELLINGTON (Reuters) - New Zealand will independently assess the risk of using China’s Huawei Technologies in 5G networks, Prime Minister Jacinda Ardern said on Monday after a report suggested that British precautions could be used by other nations. FILE PHOTO : A woman sits next to a salesperson at a Huawei shop in Bangkok, Thailand, January 30, 2019. REUTERS/Athit PerawongmethaHuawei, the world’s biggest producer of telecoms equipment, faces intense scrutiny in the West over its relationship with the Chinese government and U.S.-led allegations that its equipment could be used by Beijing for spying. No evidence has been produced publicly and the firm has repeatedly denied the allegations, which have led several Western countries to restrict Huawei’s access to their markets. The Financial Times reported on Sunday that the British government had decided it can mitigate the risks arising from the use of Huawei equipment in 5G networks. It said Britain’s conclusion would “carry great weight” with European leaders and other nations could use similar precautions. New Zealand’s intelligence agency in November rejected an initial request from telecommunications services provider Spark to use 5G equipment provided by Huawei. At the time, the Government Communications Security Bureau (GCSB) gave Spark options to mitigate national security concerns over the use of Huawei equipment, Ardern said on Monday. “The ball is now in their court,” she told a weekly news conference. Ardern said New Zealand, which is a member of the Five Eyes intelligence sharing network that includes the United Kingdom and the United States, would conduct its own assessment. “I would expect the GCSB to apply with our legislation and our own security assessments. It is fair to say Five Eyes, of course, share information but we make our own independent decisions,” she said. Huawei New Zealand did not immediately respond to a request for comment. Spark said it was in discussions with GCSB officials. “We are working through what possible mitigations we might be able to provide to address the concerns raised by the GCSB and have not yet made any decision on whether or when we should submit a revised proposal to GCSB,” Spark spokesman Andrew Pirie said in an emailed statement. The Huawei decision, along with the government’s tougher stance on China’s growing influence in the Pacific, has some politicians and foreign policy analysts worried about potential strained ties with a key trading partner. Ardern’s planned first visit to Beijing has faced scheduling issues, and China last week postponed a major tourism campaign in New Zealand days before its launch. Ardern said her government’s relationship with China was strong despite some complex issues. “Visits are not a measure of the health of a relationship they are only one small part of it,” she said, adding that trade and tourism ties remained strong. Reporting by Charlotte Greenfield, editing by Praveen Menon and Darren SchuettlerOur Standards:The Thomson Reuters Trust Principles.

Bitcoin fell below $6,000 on Tuesday, extending a steep slide that has wiped out over $200 billion of its market value in nearly two months.The digital currency’s price slid as low as $5,947.40, according to research site CoinDesk. It has fallen 70% since reaching a record high of near $20,000 in December, a drop that’s intensified in recent weeks following a global regulatory crackdown on the cryptocurrency market. Bitcoin...

France's national railway company has backtracked on plans to cancel a popular service that allows children to travel alone over Christmas.SNCF said it was cancelling the service, in which children aged between 4 and 14 are accompanied by a monitor, because of strike action. The move sparked outcry, with some 5,000 children expected to be affected.But following a "Christmas truce" from some striking drivers, SNCF said it was laying on special trains on Sunday.The announcement came amid warnings of travel chaos over the Christmas holidays in France, where workers have been striking over planned pension reforms. Why are French workers on a nationwide strike? In pictures: The pension protests rocking France Protests as France reveals pension reform details Many French citizens heading off to spend the holidays with family and friends have found themselves stranded because of cancelled trains and gridlocked roads, while hundreds of flights have also been cancelled.President Emmanuel Macron called on striking transport workers to "observe a truce out of respect for families and family life".The SNCF Junior & Co service allows the children of parents and families living in different parts of the country to travel alone during school holidays.SNCF announced earlier this week that it was cancelling the service, which was expected to run from 20 to 24 December, because of the ongoing pension strike. It cited security concerns, saying it feared it could not provide adequate supervision to the children.But critics accused the company of political spin and of trying to sell the seats for more money.The move outraged parents who were relying on the service to see their children over Christmas."I will not see my daughter at Christmas when it has been four months since I saw her. She is very disappointed," one mother told the newspaper Le Parisien. "The plane is too expensive, the bus is not possible, she is too young to travel alone... No other alternative solution is offered by SNCF".In a statement on Friday, the company said a "Christmas truce" from some rail staff had allowed it to make a "new offer at the last minute" of 5,000 seats on 14 trains on Sunday. A return service is planned for 29 December. Parents and children on Sunday said they were relieved at the decision. Eleven-year-old Lucas told Reuters news agency he would have missed seeing his father if the train had been cancelled."I would have been very disappointed because I don't see him often... I really want to see him," he said. Workers are striking over Mr Macron's plans to replace France's 42 separate pension regimes with a universal points-based system.Mr Macron's system would reward employees for each day worked, awarding points that would later be transferred into future pension benefits.But workers say the reforms would see them retiring later or facing reduced payouts.Mr Macron has called on striking workers to embrace a "spirit of responsibility"."Strike action is justifiable and protected by the constitution, but I believe there are moments in the life of a nation when it is also good to call a truce to respect families and the lives of families," he said during a trip to Ivory Coast.His office on Sunday said he would waive his right to a special presidential pension payout when he leaves office.France's presidents are legally entitled to draw a pension of about 6,000 euros ($6,650;£5,100) each month before tax after they leave office."The President of the Republic will converge... with the universal points system planned for all French people," his office said.

In recent years, Apple has become a more cautious company. Maybe even a more boring one. It’s evolved from producing world-changing tech products to selling cloud-based services that run on more than a billion Apple devices active in the wild.This year, Apple proved masterful at staying out of the way of powerful external forces such as the techlash and the trade war. Serious self-inflicted wounds akin to the “antennagate” and Apple Maps V.1 of yesteryear were minimal. So writing about what the company got right and wrong is mostly an exercise in calling out areas where it performed beyond expectations—both in its product and its policy moves—and where it didn’t go nearly far enough when it could have.Here’s what Apple got right and wrong in 2019.Good: Apple’s return to camera leadershipFor many of us, the camera is the most important feature of a smartphone. Many of the apps we’re used to—especially social ones—already rely heavily on the camera, and apps will continue using the camera in more creative and important ways. So it’s important that Apple keep delivering the cutting edge in camera tech.But during 2018, Apple’s iPhone line, which consisted of the iPhones XR, XS, and XS Max, seemed to lag behind the camera systems on other flagship devices from companies like Samsung and Google. The XS and XS Max still had the dual rear camera setup that came with the iPhone 7, which had a 12-megapixel wide-angle lens and a 12-megapixel telephoto lens with 2X optical zoom.This year Apple got its camera groove back. Its iPhone 11 line introduced a three-camera setup on the back of the phone. These included a 12-megapixel wide-angle lens, a 12-megapixel telephoto lens, and a 12-megapixel “ultra wide” lens. So the cameras offered three very distinct ways to frame a shot. The system also offered Night Site, a way to shoot far less grainy photos in low-light situations, a slicker answer to Google’s Night Mode from last year.Apple wasn’t the first out with a three-camera system. Huawei’s Mate 20 Pro was the first in 2018, and Samsung and others added three-camera systems in 2019. Apple’s edge is in the integration of the software with the camera hardware, and in how the three cameras on the back of the iPhone work together.Bad: Siri and HomePod have stagnatedWhile other tech companies’ virtual assistants keep getting smarter and more capable, Apple’s Siri assistant doesn’t seem to be advancing very quickly. This is true even though Apple got a huge head start on other assistants by debuting Siri way back in 2011. At WWDC 2019, I hoped to hear an overarching plan for Siri to do more things in a consistent way across all of Apple’s products and OS’s. After all, new AI boss John Giannandrea had already been in his job (poached from Google) for more than a year. But Siri didn’t play a big part in the presentation, and Apple hasn’t said much about improvements to its assistant since.Siri’s limitations seemed especially apparent in Apple’s HomePod speaker, which was supposed to compete with Amazon’s Echo devices (and Alexa brains) and Google’s Home speakers (with their Assistant brains). The HomePod, at $349, has not competed well in a market that seems to prefer low-priced smart speakers. Indeed Apple has made only incremental improvements to HomePod since its release in 2018, including things like the ability to recognize more than one user and the ability for two of the things to work in stereo. Nor did we see the smaller, more affordable HomePod many had predicted to show up this year.Good: Splitting iPad OS off from iOSThe iPad’s OS got some new features in 2019 that made the device feel more like a serious productivity tool—in short, more like a laptop. The new home screen, for example, looks more like the desktop of a MacBook Pro. The new Safari is less like a wimpy mobile browser and more like a powerful desktop browser. Many enhancements involve forms of multitasking. For instance you can have multiple documents from the same app open at once, and move content between them more easily.The iPad OS also got a new branding identity, which telegraphs a new vision that may diverge from the limitations of iOS, as my colleague Harry McCracken points out. It’s now called iPadOS, which suggests that Apple will keep adding new variations on iOS that exploit the larger screen of the iPad and iPad-only features such as the Pencil stylus. This name change will probably be a gift that keeps on giving for people who want to use their iPad for both work and play.Bad: Misreading the smartphone marketOn January 2, 2019, Apple CEO Tim Cook informed shareholders that Apple was slashing its quarterly revenue guidance, due to a dramatic shortfall in iPhone sales. This came after a holiday quarter where iPhone sales plummeted 14.9% year-over-year, to $51.98 billion. Poor iPhone demand in China accounted for much of the drop, though a slow pace of iPhone upgrades in developed markets was also an issue, according to Cook. “Our customers are holding on to their older iPhones a bit longer than in the past,” he said during a quarterly financial call. However, after being asked by an analyst about whether Apple now believes the iPhone lineup may be priced “too high,” Cook said no.He may have been half-right. People buy phones because they value the new features and general cool factor they get for the dollar. And the iPhone XS line simply didn’t score as well as past iPhones on that scale.Good: Trading a little thinness for battery lifeI’ve been using an iPhone 11 Pro Max for months now, and I’m still struck by how long the battery lasts. The iPhone 11 Pro Max battery lasts more than 12 hours, vs. about 10 hours for the iPhone XS Max. The battery life improvement stems in part from improvements in the power efficiency of the system-on-a-chip inside the Pro Max. But it’s also because the iPhone 11 Pro Max has a larger battery than last year’s iPhone XS Max. And there’s more room for the larger battery because the new phones are slightly thicker than the 2018 phones. As he departed Apple, Jony Ive was surely dismayed at the thicker device. But increasing battery life was one of the most crowdpleasing improvements Apple could have made to its newest phones.Bad: The AirPower non-launchApple’s AirPower charging mat was meant to charge three iDevices at once, like a Watch, an iPhone, and some AirPods wireless headphones. Apple announced the gadget in September 2017 alongside the iPhone X and iPhone 8 series, both of which featured wireless charging, and said the charging mat would ship that same year. But it didn’t. Then 2018 passed with no AirPower. Reports said the device faced overheating problems, charging activation issues, and charging level accuracy problems. Then in March of 2019, Apple canceled the product, saying that it couldn’t build something that met its own standards. This was a little surprising after Apple had managed to bring to market the AirPods, which appeared to be a much harder wireless problem. At any rate, getting through the R&D process far enough to actually announce a product, then failing to get it ready for market, is not a good look.Good: Clearing things up with QualcommIn April, Apple and chipmaker Qualcomm reached a surprise settlement after what seemed like endless wrangling over the amount of royalties Apple paid to license Qualcomm’s patented technologies. The settlement cost Apple as much as $4.7 billion, but the two companies are once again playing nice together. The deal allowed Apple and Qualcomm to enter a six-year patent license agreement as well as a multiyear chipset supply agreement. It was a good deal for Qualcomm’s modem business, but it may have been an even better deal for Apple, which is under pressure to have a 5G modem chip in its 2020 iPhones. Apple tried to help Intel build the modem chip, but Intel began to miss development milestones, and Intel’s leadership is said to have lost interest in modem chips as a business. Not long after making peace with Qualcomm, Apple bought out Intel’s 5G modem business. This may also be a smart move, because it gives Apple the intellectual property and the people it’ll need to design its own modem chip later on.Bad: Banning the HKmap.live appApple has a reputation for being progressive, idealistic, and outspoken. But those ideals sometimes fade when they come into conflict with the company’s profit-making ability. That’s what appeared to happen in November when Apple sided with the Hong Kong police (and, by extension, with China) by banning HKmap.live, an app that helped Hong Kong residents locate—and stay out of the way of—dangerous riots between police and protestors.The police said protestors were using the app to target individual officers, but never produced proof or specific examples. Nor did Apple offer such information about the alleged targeting when it sent a memo to its employees explaining its action. That’s why it’s fair to worry that the company may have chosen to appease China by siding with the Hong Kong police. Apple may have recognized that a refusal to ban the app could anger the Hong Kong police, and then escalate into a standoff with China. And as we’ve seen, the Chinese smartphone market has nationalist tendencies and can shun American products when Sino-U.S. tensions are high. China contributed 17.3% of Apple’s total revenue in the September-ending quarter.Good: Getting tough on ad-techAt its WWDC developer event in June, Apple announced a new iOS 13 and MacOS Catalina feature called “Sign in with Apple,” which is Apple’s answer to the venerable “social sign-in” buttons from Facebook, Google, Twitter, and Yahoo. These buttons offer a way to sign into apps or websites without having to enter an email address, password, and other information. But they offer the same devil’s bargain social networks like Facebook do: “We will provide you with a convenient free service, and by the way, you will pay for it with some of your personal data.”Sign in with Apple is designed to make logging into apps and sites easy—without giving up a ton of personal data as part of the bargain. It may be the company’s most tangible act of privacy protection yet. The new Sign in with Apple button provides a secure log in to participating apps and sites, verified by Face ID or Touch ID. It’s available for both iOS and MacOS apps as well as websites. But it doesn’t transmit the user’s personal information. Instead of providing an email address to the app, Apple’s button generates a randomized email that’s linked to user’s real email. And Apple creates a unique random address for each app so the user can shut down communication from a particular app at any time.Apple also made the common advertiser practice of cookie dropping a little harder in 2019. The ever-inventive ad-tech industry has figured out how to use first-party cookies (like ones dropped by this site to keep track of your interests), not their own, to track you around the web. So Apple’s WebKit team released a new policy statement that expands the power of its Intelligent Tracking Prevention (ITP) technology to prevent that practice.Bad: Not doing even more on privacyApple often says “privacy is a human right.” It can take this strong stance because it’s never relied on personal data to make money, as Facebook and Google do. And it’s in Apple’s interest to talk loudly about protecting privacy, because it wants its users to store increasing quantities of sensitive personal information such as mobile payment credentials and healthcare data on their iDevices.Apple spoke out in favor of new privacy regulation in 2019, but it could have done far more. But again money talked louder than ideals. For instance, it reportedly took billions from Google to make Google’s search engine the default in iOS, thereby letting Google collect data on Apple’s customers. Apple also allows unrestricted versions of Facebook’s data-vacuuming apps in its app store.Apple could let its privacy philosophy speak through its products more often, as it did this year with Sign in with Apple tool. For example, the company could offer online social spaces where its customers wouldn’t fear having their personal data harvested. Competing directly with Facebook’s namesake service might not be practical, but Apple may be the perfect tech giant to offer an alternative to Instagram. It controls more than a billion hardware devices in the wild, including the iPhones everybody already uses to shoot Instagram photos. Apple could offer a privacy-focused photo sharing app integrated tightly with the camera and the Photos app on every iDevice.This is probably wishful thinking, but I do hope that Apple takes more positive action on its privacy beliefs next year. Instead of just resisting the surveillance economy, Apple should create new products or tools that provide alternatives to it.All in all, I’d say Apple’s smart moves outweighed its dumb ones in 2019. And the wisdom of some of its 2019 moves—like Tim Cook’s chumminess with the Trumps—is yet to be determined.

ALEXANDRIA, Va. (Reuters) - President Donald Trump’s former campaign chairman Paul Manafort, who is on trial on tax and bank fraud charges, had $16.5 million in unreported taxable business income between 2010 and 2014, a U.S. Internal Revenue Service agent testified on Wednesday. Paul Manafort (L), former campaign chairman for U.S. President Donald Trump, in Washington, DC, U.S., December 11, 2017, and Rick Gates, former campaign aide to Trump, in Washington, U.S., December 11, 2017 are pictured in this combination photograph. REUTERS/Joshua Roberts/File PhotoIRS agent Michael Welch told a jury that Manafort’s unreported income includes foreign wire transfers to U.S. vendors like landscapers and clothiers, wire transfers to buy property, and income improperly reclassified as loans. Welch’s testimony came as prosecutors sought to refocus the courtroom’s attention on Manafort’s alleged financial crimes after his defense attorneys spent hours trying to undermine the credibility of their star witness, former Manafort business partner Rick Gates. Welch said he arrived at the $16.5 million figure based on an accounting method used by Manafort. During his review, he said, he discovered that many of the foreign wire transfers did not appear on general ledgers for Manafort’s political consultancy and therefore, “I was not able to trace it into the tax return.” Gates ended three days of testimony earlier on Wednesday, the trial’s seventh day, after admitting he lied, stole money and cheated on his wife, as lawyers for Manafort attacked his character. Manafort lawyer Kevin Downing got in a final shot in federal court in Alexandria, Virginia, raising the possibility Gates had not one, but four extramarital affairs. Prosecutors objected and Gates never answered the question. In cross-examination on Tuesday and Wednesday, Downing fired questions at Gates for several hours as he sought to portray him as an inveterate liar and thief to undermine his credibility with the jury. Meanwhile, Downing on Wednesday afternoon tried to draw the jury’s attention back to admissions by Gates that he had embezzled funds from Manafort, asking Welch if his client could claim a business embezzlement deduction. While businesses can deduct losses from theft, Welch said on redirect by one of the prosecutors: “If money is stolen from money that is untaxed, there is no deduction.” Manafort has pleaded not guilty to 18 counts of bank fraud, tax fraud and failing to disclose foreign bank accounts. According to trial testimony, he used the accounts to receive millions of dollars in payments from Ukrainian oligarchs. Manafort, a longtime Republican political consultant, is the first person to be tried on charges brought by Special Counsel Robert Mueller’s investigation into Russian interference in the 2016 U.S. presidential election. Manafort made millions of dollars working for pro-Russian Ukrainian politicians before he took an unpaid position with the Trump campaign that lasted five months. Gates, who worked as Manafort’s right-hand man for a decade, served as deputy chairman of the Trump campaign. He pleaded guilty to charges in February and is cooperating for the possibility of a reduced sentence. He testified at length about how he and Manafort doctored and backdated financial documents, hid foreign income and falsified tax returns. He said he engaged in the wrongdoing at Manafort’s direction. He also admitted to leading a “secret life,” embezzling funds from his former boss Manafort, and getting involved in other shady dealings. And the defense has tried to pin much of the blame for the financial crimes on him. After Gates left the stand on Wednesday, the jury heard from Morgan Magionos, a forensic accountant with the FBI. She said she had identified 31 accounts located in Cyprus, the Grenadines and the United Kingdom belonging to Manafort. She explained how she traced payments for luxury items back to those hidden bank accounts, describing documents from banks and corporations and how the corporate entities and offshore accounts were linked to Manafort. Prosecutors also introduced emails from Manafort to vendors of luxury items he bought in which he promises payment via wire transfers from “my” account, citing some of the offshore entities he is accused of using to hide his wealth. A conviction of Manafort would undermine efforts by Trump and some Republican lawmakers to paint Mueller’s inquiry as a political witch hunt, while an acquittal would be a setback for the special counsel. Rudy Giuliani, a lawyer for Trump, on Wednesday again called for Mueller to end his inquiry “without further delay.” Prosecutors have said they hope to finish presenting their case by the end of the week. U.S. District Judge T.S. Ellis has repeatedly prodded them to move swiftly while seemingly giving the defense more latitude. He also has repeatedly made comments that some legal experts say may prejudice the jury against the prosecution. The judge has belittled and yelled at prosecutors in front of the jury and made comments that could undercut the prosecutor’s case and help the defense. Washington attorney Gene Rossi, a former federal prosecutor in Virginia who has appeared before Ellis hundreds of times, said the comment was “classic Judge Ellis injecting his views into the courtroom.” If he is too tough, Rossi said, the jury might “start to feel sorry for the prosecution.” Although questions tied to the Trump campaign have been severely limited at trial, Manafort remains a central figure in the broader inquiry into the Trump campaign’s dealings with Russia, including a 2016 Trump Tower meeting at which Russians promised “dirt” on Democratic presidential candidate Hillary Clinton and his role in watering down the 2016 Republican Party platform position on Ukraine. Reporting by Sarah N. Lynch, Nathan Layne and Karen Freifeld; Writing by Doina Chiacu and Warren Strobel; Editing by Grant McCool and Lisa ShumakerOur Standards:The Thomson Reuters Trust Principles.

HONG KONG — A brazen overnight attack by a mob of men with sticks and metal bars who were apparently targeting antigovernment protesters raised tensions in Hong Kong to new levels on Monday after weeks of demonstrations, prompting fears of violence spiraling beyond the authorities’ control.Dozens of people, including journalists and a pro-democracy lawmaker, were injured in the assault in and around a train station in Yuen Long, a satellite town in northwestern Hong Kong near the border with mainland China.The violence followed clashes earlier in the evening between the police and protesters near the Chinese government’s liaison office in Hong Kong, and raised questions about why officers did not protect demonstrators, who have been critical of the police’s use of force in recent weeks.Protesters painted graffiti on the Chinese government’s liaison office in Hong Kong on Sunday, and threw ink on the crest of the Chinese state displayed there, an act that Chinese officials said “openly challenged the authority of the central government.” Earlier, demonstrators participated in a peaceful march calling for an independent investigation into accusations of police brutality.On Monday, Carrie Lam, the Hong Kong chief executive, said she condemned both the vandalizing of the liaison office, which she said challenged China’s sovereignty and “hurt the nation’s feelings,” and the mob attacks in Yuen Long.ImageRiot police officers talking to men armed with sticks outside a train station in Yuen Long, a Hong Kong border town near mainland China. Dozens of people were beaten in an attack at the station late Sunday after a pro-democracy protest.Credit...Lam Yik Fei for The New York Times“Violence will only breed more violence,” she said at a news conference.Media outlets in mainland China, which had previously given little notice to the protests, carried stories Monday on the damage to the liaison office and Hong Kong and central government officials’ denunciations of that vandalism. A report from CCTV, the main state news broadcaster, showed graffiti on the exterior of the office, and comments on Chinese social media were full of criticism for the Hong Kong protesters.The People’s Daily, the mouthpiece of the Chinese Communist Party, ran a front-page commentary Monday that said the damage to the liaison office “not only trampled on the rule of law in Hong Kong, but also openly challenged the authority of the central government.”With the attacks in Yuen Long, the protests have entered a stage that many Hong Kong activists fear from past experience: the use of thugs to intimidate demonstrators. The injured said they believed the attackers were members of organized crime societies known as triads, and they have complained that the violence was encouraged by government supporters and ignored by the police.“I have strong reason to believe they were gangsters,” said Lam Cheuk-ting, a pro-democracy lawmaker who was hit on his arms, hands and face, leaving his mouth with a cut that required 18 stitches to close. “I don’t think any ordinary citizens have done such sophisticated, organized attacks on this kind of level.”Mr. Lam said he learned that someone was being assaulted in the station around 9 p.m., and he warned the police in Yuen Long. He then went there by train, where he said thugs carrying batons and wearing white shirts were running rampant.“They repeatedly went into the train and were using batons to indiscriminately attack all the people in the train,” he said. “Many journalists, even a pregnant woman, all ordinary citizens of Hong Kong, were attacked by those gangsters.”The protests in Hong Kong began weeks ago over a proposal that would allow extraditions to mainland China, but have spread to encompass demands for direct elections for the city’s leader and complaints about the use of force by police against demonstrators.[In 1997, the Chinese government promised that it would maintain “one country, two systems” in Hong Kong for the next 50 years.]Mr. Lam condemned the police response to the mob attack as woefully inadequate, saying that the group was seen gathering as early as 6 p.m.Yau Nai-keung, an assistant district police commander in Yuen Long, said early Monday that officers had made no arrests and found no weapons.But in one encounter captured by photojournalists, the riot police spoke with two masked men in white shirts holding metal bars or sticks, patting one on the shoulder before walking off.“It’s unbelievable,” said Mr. Lam, the lawmaker. “The behavior of the police force is really disgusting and shameless.”Stephen Lo, the Hong Kong police commissioner, suggested that the protests contributed to the slow police response to the violence at the train station.“Our manpower is stretched because every time when there is a major event which will lead to violent confrontations we have to deploy some manpower from various districts to Hong Kong Island,” he said.On Monday evening, a day after the violence, the police said they had arrested six men in Yuen Long and outlying areas on charges of illegal assembly. Police said some of the men had triad backgrounds, and showed reporters wooden sticks allegedly used as weapons.Gwyneth Ho, a journalist for the Hong Kong-based online outlet Stand News, continued live streaming the violence even after she was attacked. Ms. Ho wrote on Facebook that she had swelling on her head, had bruises on her back and needed four stitches on her right shoulder.Galileo Cheng, social affairs executive for the Hong Kong Catholic Institution Staff Association, said he took a train to Yuen Long after attending protests earlier in the day. He also live streamed the violence, but his feed went dark after he too was attacked. His upper lip, elbow and hands were injured, and a helmet he was wearing was cracked.“Those thugs kept assaulting me and even assaulted a woman with an infant at her waist,” he said.The Hospital Authority of Hong Kong said 45 people were injured in Yuen Long, and one was in serious condition. Another 14 people sought treatment after clashes between the police and protesters near the Chinese liaison office on Hong Kong Island, about an hour south by train.Locals were angered by what appeared to be police complacency, saying the authorities did not answer their phone calls or register their complaints at the station on Sunday. Terry Lin, a 32-year-old designer, said that he was one of the first people to rush to the local police station after seeing the men in white approach the train station with sticks, but the police eventually closed the metal gates to a growing crowd of residents after registering a few complaints, citing security concerns.Pro-democracy and establishment parties condemned the violence, but some government supporters were accused of playing down or even endorsing the attacks on the protesters. A pro-establishment legislator, Junius Ho, was seen in a video circulating late Sunday with a group of men in Yuen Long carrying Hong Kong flags and dressed in white shirts, the uniform of the attackers.“Thank you for your efforts,” he said. “You guys are my heroes.”Mr. Ho denied any connection with the attacks and said he was simply talking with people who came up to him as he was walking past them.On Saturday, pro-government demonstrators gathered near the government headquarters to express their support for the police. One speaker, Arthur Shek, a founder of The Hong Kong Economic Times, told attendees to use canes or PVC pipes to respond to protesters.“What do we use them for? To teach our sons,” he said. “So remember one thing: We don’t need force, we need discipline. You use a cane to teach your son — how can you call this violent?”Hong Kong has a long history of thugs and gang members intimidating protesters. During the pro-democracy Umbrella Movement in 2014, a group of men including some triad members and people apparently from mainland China attacked a protest camp that was occupying a roadway in the Mong Kok district. And in 1989, after soldiers crushed pro-democracy protests in Beijing and other Chinese cities, a Hong Kong event to mourn the dead was canceled after a confrontation between police officers and men believed to have come from the mainland.After Mrs. Lam’s comments on Monday, one prominent former lawmaker from a traditionally pro-establishment party called on her to resign. “Are triads ruling Hong Kong now?” the former lawmaker, James Tien, wrote on Facebook.“I’ve never asked you to resign before, but after what happened in Yuen Long last night, if you still don’t resign, Hong Kong will never see peace again!” he added.Even as Hong Kong officials promised to aggressively pursue the attackers at the train station and tried to discourage reprisals, fears of renewed violence spread on Monday. Local news outlets reported that some residents were told not to go to the center of Yuen Long town in the afternoon and evening.Some businesses in the area closed early, and HSBC, the largest bank in Hong Kong, told employees they could leave work early because of the possibility of “disruptions” in Yuen Long and the nearby town of Tuen Mun.

Venezuelan opposition leader Juan Guaidó has said he is considering asking the US to launch a military intervention in the embattled country.Speaking to the BBC's Nick Bryant, he said he would "evaluate all options" to oust President Nicolás Maduro.Last week he launched a failed attempt to spark a military rebellion and force Mr Maduro out of power.The president responded by delivering an address from an army base in Caracas, flanked by soldiers.Mr Guaidó declared himself Venezuela's interim leader in January. As the head of the opposition-controlled National Assembly, he invoked the constitution to assume an interim presidency, arguing that Mr Maduro's re-election last year was illegitimate.But Mr Maduro - who is backed by Russia, China and the leaders of Venezuela's military - has refused to cede power. Who is Juan Guaidó? Profile: Nicolás Maduro Mr Guaidó has the support of more than 50 countries, including the US, UK and most Latin American nations - and he has told the BBC that US support for him has been "decisive"."I think President [Donald] Trump's position is very firm, which we appreciate, as does the entire world," he said.Asked whether he would like Mr Trump and the US military to intervene, he responded it is "responsible to evaluate" the possibility of international intervention, adding: "I, as the president in charge of the national parliament, will evaluate all options if necessary."Mr Trump told reporters on Friday that he wasn't looking to get the US military involved in Venezuela. He said that in a call, Russian president Vladimir Putin had assured him that "he is not looking to get involved in Venezuela other than he'd like to see something positive happen for Venezuela", before adding: "And I feel the same way."But Secretary of State Mike Pompeo had much stronger words for Russia on Sunday, telling the US broadcaster ABC that "the Russians must get out"."It's very clear, we want the Russians out, we want the Iranians out, we want the Cubans out," he said.In response to the clashes this week, Mr Maduro appeared on Friday flanked by soldiers at an army base in Caracas, calling on the armed forces to defeat "any coup plotter". "No one dare touch our sacred ground or bring war to Venezuela," he added, in a show of defiance that followed days of clashes. Four people died in the violence, including two teenagers. But Mr Guaidó denies that he has been defeated, telling the BBC that President Maduro "has been losing again and again"."I think the only one who really hurts himself is Maduro," he said. "He has been losing again and again. He is increasingly weak, increasingly alone, and has no international support. On the contrary, we gain acceptance, support and future options."He also claims that it is "clearly visible that the armed forces no longer support Maduro".On Wednesday, both pro- and anti-government supporters held demonstrations in Caracas which were initially peaceful.There were reports of gunfire in the city, and a local NGO, the Venezuelan Observatory of Social Conflict, said Jurubith Rausseo, 27, had been shot dead during a rally in the opposition stronghold of Altamira. Is there a new cult of personality in Venezuela? How much aid is getting into Venezuela? Who is buying Venezuela's oil? At least 46 people were injured in clashes between opposition supporters and the security forces.On Tuesday, Mr Guaidó declared what he called the "final phase" of the operation to topple Mr Maduro. He posted a video of him with a number of men in uniform and said he had the support of "brave soldiers" in Caracas.He urged Venezuelans to join them on the streets, and appeared alongside another opposition leader, Leopoldo López, who had been under house arrest after being found guilty of inciting violence during protests in 2014.Spain's government later said that Mr López and his family had sought safety in their embassy, but said the opposition figure had not claimed political asylum. An arrest warrant for violating the house arrest order was issued for Mr López, according to a statement on the Supreme Court's website. The order stated that Mr López should continue to serve the rest of his 13-year sentence in prison. Spain said it had no intention of handing over Mr López to the Venezuelan authorities.

When the Democratic presidential candidates gather in Los Angeles next Thursday to debate for the sixth time, the stage will look rather different than it did when the contenders first faced off back in June.A field that was initially celebrated for its diversity has been whittled down to seven debate participants: the former vice-president Joe Biden, Senator Bernie Sanders, Senator Elizabeth Warren, Mayor Pete Buttigieg, Senator Amy Klobuchar, billionaire activist Tom Steyer and entrepreneur Andrew Yang. Five of them are men, and all but one of them are white.The radical reversal of fortunes for the women and people of color in the Democratic presidential primary has led to some criticism – even from the candidates themselves – about the qualifications for making the debate stage. Some White House hopefuls have argued the Democratic National Committee’s debate requirements have sidelined candidates of color, even as the party becomes increasingly diverse.In order to qualify for the Los Angeles debate, candidates had to hit at least 4% in four national polls or at least 6% in two early state polls in the weeks leading up to the event. Candidates also had to attract at least 200,000 donors, although more campaigns were able to meet that requirement. The DNC announced on Friday the scheduling of four additional debates between January and February, but the qualifications for those debates have not yet been released.The Hawaii congresswoman Tulsi Gabbard announced on Monday that she would not participate in this month’s debate, even if she qualified. (The Iraq war veteran ended up falling one poll short of qualification.) Gabbard, who has previously accused the DNC of trying to “hijack the election” by only accepting results from certain pollsters, said she would “instead choose to spend that precious time directly meeting with and hearing from the people of New Hampshire and South Carolina”.Although Gabbard’s incendiary accusations against the DNC are unique among the presidential candidates, some of her opponents have joined her in criticizing the debate qualifications. Cory Booker, the New Jersey senator who failed to pick up a single qualifying poll for the December debate, has complained since the withdrawal of fellow senator Kamala Harris that the DNC’s requirements prop up billionaire candidates like Steyer and Mike Bloomberg, who will not participate on Thursday, at the expense of candidates of color.“Is that really the symbol that the Democratic party wants to be sending out? That this is going to be made by money and elites’ decisions, not by the people?” Booker recently told BuzzFeed News. The New Jersey senator has suggested the DNC should use metrics beyond polling – such as grassroots support and endorsements – to determine who makes the debate stage.While his fellow presidential candidate Julián Castro, a former member of Barack Obama’s cabinet, has similarly complained about the difficulties that candidates of color have faced in the nominating contest, the former housing and urban development secretary does not echo Booker’s call for a re-evaluation of the debate qualifications.Sawyer Hackett, Castro’s national press secretary, told the Guardian: “He’s not looking for any sort of change to the rules at the last minute to benefit himself for the Democratic debate in December, but rather looking for a more systematic, wholesale change to the process so that our primaries are a little more reflective of our party and our country’s diversity.”Castro has previously argued the media’s “flawed” focus on “electability” has buoyed white candidates, an advantage that he says is amplified by the mostly white states of Iowa and New Hampshire voting first in the primary.Aaron Kall, the director of debate at the University of Michigan, noted that debate-related complaints are not unique to this election cycle, recalling criticism from Sanders supporters about the number and the scheduling of the events during the 2016 primary. The DNC later added debates to appease concerns that the party establishment was trying to tip the election in favor of Hillary Clinton. “Every cycle, these complaints have happened, and the DNC has tried to address them,” Kall said. “In some ways, they’re kind of damned if they do, damned if they don’t.”While Kall acknowledged the polling requirements established by the DNC are “not perfect,” he pointed out that Booker and Castro face steep odds of winning the primary given their current levels of support.“I think that anyone that’s probably likely to be the nominee at this point would be polling at the threshold set up by the DNC,” Kall said. However, he added, “Whatever the qualifications or thresholds may be, the impact is really hurting the diversity of this Los Angeles debate.”Despite the challenges facing them, the candidates of color remaining in the race are not showing any sign of calling it quits. While Gabbard campaigns in New Hampshire and South Carolina, Booker is kicking off an Iowa bus tour on the day of the debate.Booker’s campaign manager, Addisu Demissie, said on a Thursday press call that the team had raised $3m since the last debate and would soon launch a $500,000 ad buy in Iowa. Hackett also noted that Castro saw better fundraising numbers during the November debate, for which he did not qualify, than he did during either of his previous two debate performances.“Whether he’s onstage or not, he’s shaping the debate on a lot of important issues,” Hackett said. “He will continue to do that.” Topics Democrats US elections 2020 US politics Cory Booker Julian Castro Race features

1. Again, Linux is a kernel. Still. 2. Linux doesn't dominate servers. Various distros based on the Linux kernel and GNU software are what servers run. Not just a single version of the Linux kernel. Mostly different versions of the kernel with different patches with varying support periods. RHEL is quite different from Debian stable and Ubuntu LTS. 3. Software compatibility in the world of Linux is basically a swear word. You can't have a successful OS without good backward and forward compatibility. Most 32bit applications from Windows 95 work just fine in Windows 10 64. You can compile software in Windows 10 which will perfectly run in Windows 7. Try compiling something in Fedora 31 and running it in Ubuntu 14.10. Good luck. 4. Stable APIs/ABIs in the world of Linux are basically a swear word. 5. Hardware support is a mysterious creature in the world of Linux. Your hardware might be 100% supported and work fine, but then it might have bugs which affect only a few people and these bugs may linger for ages, and in rare cases it might cease to work because of a new regression. And then there are devices which are not properly supported or not supported at all. 6. User experience breaking regressions and changes. E.g. Fedora 31 was released with broken bitmap fonts support [redhat.com]. The bug has been known for over three months already - no one gives a fuck. Gnome 3 was in general a huge regression in terms of usability (and some believe it still is). And there are plenty of other examples. 7. Various quirks and tiny bugs no one cares to fix. Linux distros have just too many of them. E.g. complete working Hi-DPI displays support is still not there even though we've had them for almost ten years. 8. No universal packaging format which doesn't carry all the dependencies with it (e.g. snap, flatpak, appimage). And tons of other issues no one really cares about. Again, this list of Linux problems [altervista.org] is still as relevant as ever.