Labor and Jobs

Subterms

    More stories

    • 150 Shares99 Views

      in Elections

      X Spaces With Trump and Musk Is Off to a Glitchy Start

      by

      Elon Musk’s live conversation with former president Donald J. Trump on X got off to a glitchy start on Monday, a setback for the social media service as Mr. Musk pushes the company to regain its dominance as an online epicenter of political discourse.Some users who tried to listen to the conversation, which was hosted on the company’s audio livestreaming feature called Spaces, were greeted by silence and an error message that read: “Details not available.” Users said they had trouble accessing the livestream on desktop computers and mobile phones. Those who were able to get the livestream to work were met with hold music. The Spaces event was originally scheduled to start at 8 p.m. Eastern. The number of attendees fluctuated wildly as users struggled to gain access, drifting between 100,000 and more than 700,000 listeners. Mr. Musk blamed a cyberattack known as a distributed denial of service attack, or DDoS, for the glitches. DDoS attacks work by flooding servers with malicious traffic and knocking them offline. “Worst case, we will proceed with a smaller number of live listeners and post the conversation later,” he wrote. The attack could not immediately be verified.Mr. Musk claimed the system had been tested “with 8 million concurrent listeners” earlier that day.He had spent Sunday evening testing the service to make sure it could stay up and running by streaming himself playing a video game. We are having trouble retrieving the article content.Please enable JavaScript in your browser settings.Thank you for your patience while we verify access. If you are in Reader mode please exit and log into your Times account, or subscribe for all of The Times.Thank you for your patience while we verify access.Already a subscriber? Log in.Want all of The Times? Subscribe. More

    • 138 Shares199 Views

      in Elections

      Why Google, Microsoft and Amazon Shy Away From Buying A.I. Start-Ups

      by

      Google, Microsoft and Amazon have made deals with A.I. start-ups for their technology and top employees, but have shied from owning the firms. Here’s why.In 2022, Noam Shazeer and Daniel De Freitas left their jobs developing artificial intelligence at Google. They said the tech giant moved too slowly. So they created Character.AI, a chatbot start-up, and raised nearly $200 million.Last week, Mr. Shazeer and Mr. De Freitas announced that they were returning to Google. They had struck a deal to rejoin its A.I. research arm, along with roughly 20 percent of Character.AI’s employees, and provide their start-up’s technology, they said.But even though Google was getting all that, it was not buying Character.AI.Instead, Google agreed to pay $3 billion to license the technology, two people with knowledge of the deal said. About $2.5 billion of that sum will then be used to buy out Character.AI’s shareholders, including Mr. Shazeer, who owns 30 percent to 40 percent of the company and stands to net $750 million to $1 billion, the people said. What remains of Character.AI will continue operating without its founders and investors.The deal was one of several unusual transactions that have recently emerged in Silicon Valley. While big tech companies typically buy start-ups outright, they have turned to a more complicated deal structure for young A.I. companies. It involves licensing the technology and hiring the top employees — effectively swallowing the start-up and its main assets — without becoming the owner of the firm.These transactions are being driven by the big tech companies’ desire to sidestep regulatory scrutiny while trying to get ahead in A.I., said three people who have been involved in such agreements. Google, Amazon, Meta, Apple and Microsoft are under a magnifying glass from agencies like the Federal Trade Commission over whether they are squashing competition, including by buying start-ups.“Large tech firms may clearly be trying to avoid regulatory scrutiny by not directly acquiring the targeted firms,” said Justin Johnson, a business economist who focuses on antitrust at Cornell University. But “these deals do indeed start to look a lot like regular acquisitions.”We are having trouble retrieving the article content.Please enable JavaScript in your browser settings.Thank you for your patience while we verify access. If you are in Reader mode please exit and log into your Times account, or subscribe for all of The Times.Thank you for your patience while we verify access.Already a subscriber? Log in.Want all of The Times? Subscribe. More

    • 88 Shares189 Views

      in Elections

      Stocks Drop as Jobs Report Shakes Market

      by

      Stocks skidded on Friday, capping off a turbulent week for Wall Street, as investors were jolted by data showing that hiring slowed and unemployment rose in July.The spiking uncertainty about the economic outlook, and the question of whether the Federal Reserve has been too slow to raise interest rates, was evident across financial markets.The S&P 500 fell 2.4 percent within the hour after the jobs report was released, while the tech-heavy Nasdaq dropped 3 percent. Yields on government bonds, which are sensitive to expectations for the economy, dropped sharply, and oil prices were lower too.The U.S. economy added 114,000 jobs on a seasonally adjusted basis, much fewer than economists had expected and a significant drop from the average of 215,000 jobs added over the previous 12 months. The unemployment rate rose to 4.3 percent, the highest level since October 2021.“That all-important macro data we have been hammering for months is finally starting to turn in an ominous direction,” said Alex McGrath, chief investment officer at NorthEnd Private Wealth.Markets are now predicting a half a percent cut in interest rates at the Fed’s next meeting in September, up from the quarter-point cut investors had been anticipating as of Thursday, according to CME FedWatch. The two-year Treasury yield, which is also reflective of short-term interest rate expectations, fell 20 basis points, to 3.96 percent.This week had already been a rocky one for Wall Street. The Federal Reserve’s indication on Wednesday that it was moving closer to cutting interest rates in September prompted an accelerated market rally, and the S&P 500 rose 2 percent on comments by Jerome H. Powell, the Fed chair.But the market sold off on Thursday, with the S&P 500 falling 1.4 percent, led lower by a drop in chip stocks and economic data suggesting the economy is cooling. The 10-year U.S. Treasury yield — which underpins many other borrowing costs — also dropped below 4 percent on Thursday.All this comes as investors started reconsidering their appetite for big technology stocks last month and bought up shares of smaller companies, which are particularly sensitive to borrowing costs and stand to benefit from interest rate cuts. Also driving this shift is a rethink among investors about the potential for artificial intelligence to continue to drive gains at big companies like Microsoft, Nvidia and Alphabet, after shares of those businesses surged in the past year. More

    • 63 Shares129 Views

      in Elections

      Productivity Surges 2.3%, Beating Forecasts

      by

      The NewsProductivity grew at a 2.3 percent annual rate in the second quarter, the U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics reported on Thursday, surpassing economists’ expectations. The pickup was a major improvement upon the sluggish 0.4 percent rate in the first quarter. And on a yearly basis, productivity increased 2.7 percent. That far exceeds prepandemic averages.An assembly line at a car plant in Michigan in April.Bill Pugliano/Getty ImagesWhy It Matters: A key to prosperity.A highly productive economy generally means businesses and workers are operating efficiently, making more money in fewer hours. In the second quarter, production was up 3.3 percent, while hours worked rose 1 percent.On a less technical level, productivity is best explained by the old axiom of “doing more with less” or the folksy virtue of “getting the biggest bang for your buck.”Economists tend to sigh with relief when they see productivity gains because it offers a potential “win-win” for workers, customers and business owners: If businesses can make more money in fewer work hours, then — according to basic economic logic — they can presumably make more dollars per hour, while also reinvesting and giving workers raises, without sacrificing profits.Being able to make more with less (or with the same amount of labor and machinery) also means businesses may not feel as much pressure to set higher prices to push profits. That, too, is welcome news after a yearslong bout of inflation.Facts to Keep in Mind: A volatile indicator.Productivity, at a basic level, is calculated as a simple ratio: the total amount of output an economy produces per hour worked by its labor force. But the output side of the equation is adjusted for inflation on a quarterly basis. That can cause volatility, in both directions.We are having trouble retrieving the article content.Please enable JavaScript in your browser settings.Thank you for your patience while we verify access. If you are in Reader mode please exit and log into your Times account, or subscribe for all of The Times.Thank you for your patience while we verify access.Already a subscriber? Log in.Want all of The Times? Subscribe. More

    • 113 Shares199 Views

      in Elections

      Amazon Workers Narrowly Reject Union Drive at British Warehouse

      by

      The vote, which would have forced the tech giant to negotiate collectively with workers, was the closest an Amazon center in Britain had come to being unionized.A fight to form the first union at an Amazon warehouse in Britain came to an end this week, as organizers of the effort fell short by just 28 votes.About 2,600 employees at the warehouse in Coventry, in the Midlands of England, took part in a ballot for union recognition, which would have forced Amazon to negotiate collectively with the bulk of workers there over working conditions, as well as pay, holiday and other benefits. More than 3,000 Amazon workers were eligible to vote.But in the end, the effort failed, with only 49.5 percent voting in favor in a poll approved by the Central Arbitration Committee, a government body. It is the closest any Amazon center in Britain has come to being unionized.The results come amid accusations by GMB, a nationwide union, lawyers and some workers that the American tech giant had been heavy-handed in its efforts to discourage unionization. Amazon has a history of pushing back against union movements. In the United States, only one warehouse, on Staten Island, has a formally recognized union. A labor union in Germany has been trying to get collective bargaining powers for more than a decade.The vote fell “agonizingly short” of a majority, said GMB, which counts Amazon employees among its 500,000 members from various occupations.“Amazon bosses have created a culture of fear for low-paid workers trying to improve their pay, terms and conditions,” said Stuart Richards, an organizer at GMB.We are having trouble retrieving the article content.Please enable JavaScript in your browser settings.Thank you for your patience while we verify access. If you are in Reader mode please exit and log into your Times account, or subscribe for all of The Times.Thank you for your patience while we verify access.Already a subscriber? Log in.Want all of The Times? Subscribe. More

    • 188 Shares179 Views

      in Elections

      The Sunday Read: ‘A Republican Election Clerk vs. Trump Die-Hards in a World of Lies’

      by

      Tally Abecassis and Listen and follow The DailyApple Podcasts | Spotify | Amazon Music | YouTubeCindy Elgan glanced into the lobby of her office and saw a sheriff’s deputy waiting at the front counter. “Let’s start a video recording, just in case this goes sideways,” Elgan, 65, told one of her employees in the Esmeralda County clerk’s office. She had come to expect skepticism, conspiracy theories and even threats related to her job as an election administrator. She grabbed her annotated booklet of Nevada state laws, said a prayer for patience and walked into the lobby to confront the latest challenge to America’s electoral process.The deputy was standing alongside a woman that Elgan recognized as Mary Jane Zakas, 77, a longtime elementary schoolteacher and a leader in the local Republican Party. She often asked for a sheriff’s deputy to accompany her to the election’s office, in case her meetings became contentious.“I hope you’re having a blessed morning,” Zakas said. “Unfortunately, a lot of people are still very concerned about the security of their votes. They’ve lost all trust in the system.”After the 2020 election, former President Donald J. Trump’s denials and accusations of voter fraud spread outward from the White House to even the country’s most remote places, like Esmeralda County. Elgan knew most of the 620 voters in the town. Still, they accused her of being paid off and skimming votes away from Trump. And even though their allegations came with no evidence, they wanted her recalled from office before the next presidential election in November.There are a lot of ways to listen to “The Daily.” Here’s how.We want to hear from you. Tune in, and tell us what you think. Email us at thedaily@nytimes.com. Follow Michael Barbaro on X: @mikiebarb. And if you’re interested in advertising with The Daily, write to us at thedaily-ads@nytimes.com.Additional production for The Sunday Read was contributed by Isabella Anderson, Anna Diamond, Sarah Diamond, Elena Hecht, Emma Kehlbeck, Tanya Pérez, Frannie Carr Toth and Krish Seenivasan. More

    • 88 Shares169 Views

      in Elections

      What if the A.I. Boosters Are Wrong?

      by

      A skeptical paper by Daron Acemoglu, a labor economist at M.I.T., has triggered a heated debate over whether artificial intelligence will supercharge productivity.Despite the advent of personal computers, the internet and other high-tech innovations, much of the industrialized world is stuck in an economic growth slump, with O.E.C.D. countries expected to expand on aggregate just 1.7 percent this year. Economists sometimes call this phenomenon the productivity paradox.The big new hope is that artificial intelligence will snap this mediocrity streak — but doubts are creeping in. And one especially skeptical paper by Daron Acemoglu, a labor economist at M.I.T., has triggered a heated debate.Acemoglu concluded that A.I. would contribute only “modest” improvement to worker productivity, and that it would add no more than 1 percent to U.S. economic output over the next decade. That pales in comparison to estimates by Goldman Sachs economists, who predicted last year that generative A.I. could raise global G.D.P. by 7 percent over the same period.The bullish camp has great hopes for A.I. Sam Altman of the ChatGPT maker OpenAI sees A.I. wiping out poverty. Jensen Huang, the C.E.O. of Nvidia, the dominant maker of the chips used to power A.I., says the technology has ushered in “the next industrial revolution.”But if the boosters are wrong, it could be trouble for the developed world, which is in desperate need of a productivity breakthrough as its work force ages and declines.A.I. won’t reverse stagnation, Acemoglu told DealBook. One reason: The technology can automate only about 5 percent of an office worker’s tasks, he found. “A.I. has much more to offer to help with the productivity problem. But it will not do that on its current path, that’s why I’m so troubled by the hype,” he said.We are having trouble retrieving the article content.Please enable JavaScript in your browser settings.Thank you for your patience while we verify access. If you are in Reader mode please exit and log into your Times account, or subscribe for all of The Times.Thank you for your patience while we verify access.Already a subscriber? Log in.Want all of The Times? Subscribe. More

    • 138 Shares99 Views

      in Elections

      CNN Cuts 100 Jobs, and Announces Plan for Digital Subscription Product

      by

      The network’s C.E.O., Mark Thompson, has promised a more robust digital strategy as people flee traditional cable packages.CNN’s top leader announced 100 job cuts on Wednesday as well as a digital strategy that would include a new subscription-only digital offering by the end of the year.The company is laying off around 100 people, or about 3 percent of its work force. The layoffs would come “across the company,” Mark Thompson, the network’s chairman, said in a memo to employees. CNN last had significant layoffs in late 2022.Mr. Thompson announced the job cuts as the company began to unveil steps on a digital plan that he said would help the network “regain a leadership position in the news experiences of the future.”Mr. Thompson, the former chief executive of The New York Times and a senior leader at the BBC, has been in charge of CNN since October 2023. He has promised a more robust digital strategy as people flee traditional cable packages in favor of streaming entertainment.CNN’s ratings have plummeted over the last two years, more so than those of its primary competitors, Fox News and MSNBC. Additionally, CNN’s parent, Warner Bros. Discovery, has an enormous debt load, and its share price has fallen sharply this year.CNN got a recent shot in the arm when it organized and broadcast the first presidential debate in late June, an event that continued to set off alarm bells within the Democratic Party about the future of President Biden’s campaign. CNN made the debate available for other outlets to broadcast, and it drew more than 50 million viewers overall. About 9.5 million of those watched on CNN.As part of the announcement on Wednesday, Mr. Thompson said CNN.com’s “first subscription product” would debut later this year. He also said the company would create “a growing stable of ‘news you can use’ offerings” in lifestyle coverage. Additionally, he said the company would make a push into artificial intelligence.Mr. Thompson laid out a reorganization that would include merging three separate newsrooms (U.S. news gathering, international news gathering and digital news) under one leader, Virginia Moseley. And on the prime-time television front, he has directed deputies to “increase audience competitiveness and also keep a close eye on production costs.”“Turning a great news organization toward the future is not a one-day affair,” Mr. Thompson wrote in a memo to employees. “It happens in stages and over time. Today’s announcements do not answer every question or seek to solve every challenge we face. However, they do represent a significant step forward.” More