Categories
Selected Articles

We’re All Working for the Algorithm Now

A woman sits behind a ring light and takes pictures of herself with her phone camera.

“The camera eats first.”

A decade ago, that phrase might have been a joke about influencers and their avocado toast. Now it’s a shorthand for how every corner of life—dinners, cleaning, milestones, even grief—can be packaged for public consumption. We live in a world where intimacy has become inventory, where the difference between living and posting is often just a matter of lighting.

[time-brightcove not-tgx=”true”]

The rise of the creator economy has blurred the line between the personal and the performative. What was once private—a positive pregnancy test, a baby shower, a child’s first day of school—has become brand content. For many creators, the more intimate the moment, the more lucrative the post. The financial incentive to share has turned the private self into an asset class.

But creators didn’t invent this culture of exposure. The blueprint was laid years ago by mommy bloggers, whose lives became a business model. Now, their children, who grew up online, are speaking out, questioning why their childhood memories became monetized content. Their discomfort is a warning: We have turned our most personal experiences into public labor.

Social media platforms reward visibility. Algorithms don’t distinguish between authenticity and performance—they simply amplify what’s most clickable. As journalist Chanté Joseph wrote in British Vogue, even dating has become entangled with the creator economy. Women once gained status online by showing off a relationship; now, they hide their partners to preserve engagement rates. In a digital ecosystem where follower counts can dictate income, posting your boyfriend isn’t just emotional—it’s a business risk.

That’s because attention equals opportunity. The influencer industry is projected to be worth $480 billion by 2027. More than 200 million people around the world now call themselves creators, with about 27 million in the U.S. alone. Universities are taking notice: Syracuse University recently launched a Center for the Creator Economy to study this new professional class. As social strategist Jayde Powell told me, “Academia is going to start teaching content creation skills that you can learn inside your university classes. Once these students go out into the real world, they can become professional content creators.” 

She’s right—and the field is already evolving. The most successful creators, or “creatorpreneurs,” aren’t just posting videos; they’re building empires. Michelle Phan, who started out making YouTube makeup tutorials, co-founded the beauty subscription service IPSY and her own cosmetics line, EM Cosmetics. Jackie Aina used her online following to launch FORVR MOOD, a luxury fragrance brand sold at Sephora. Their success stories are now case studies for an economy built on visibility.

But visibility is fickle. Only about 4% of creators earn over $100,000 a year, according to Goldman Sachs. The average income for most is far lower. Aneesh Lal, founder of the B2B creator agency The Wishly Group, says his LinkedIn influencers typically make between $20,000 and $25,000 in their first six months—a respectable sum, but hardly reflective of the labor involved in building a personal brand. Lal’s clients, he says, appeal to brands precisely because LinkedIn feels “safe”—a place to reach affluent audiences without the trolling that plagues other platforms. Even corporate executives are now influencers, blurring the boundaries between leadership and self-promotion.

Beneath the glamor lies a system with few guardrails. There’s no standard pay rate, no guaranteed protections for minors, and almost no labor regulation. Only a handful of states—California and Illinois among them—require that child influencers receive a portion of their earnings. And racial inequities persist. Creators of color consistently earn less than their white peers, even when their work drives cultural trends.

The cracks are showing. When brands cancel partnerships over controversies—like Huda Beauty’s decision to cut ties with influencer Huda Mustafa after a racial slur incident—the fallout exposes the moral instability of the entire ecosystem. As writer Victor Quennell Vaughns Jr. observed in EBONY, “The beauty of a brand is not in its packaging, it’s in its principles.”

Yet the creator economy’s reach only grows. Even journalists—long the chroniclers of other people’s stories—are becoming creator journalists, publishing independently through newsletters and video platforms. The logic of visibility has infiltrated every profession: If you’re not building an audience, you’re falling behind.

The problem isn’t creation itself. It’s that the platforms and policies surrounding it reward constant exposure while offering little protection in return. Data is monetized, privacy erodes, and the line between “sharing” and “working” disappears. Until social platforms compensate users for their data and labor, we remain unpaid workers in a trillion-dollar industry that thrives on our attention.

So perhaps the quietest rebellion is the simplest one. The next time the meal arrives, maybe let yourself eat first—and leave the phone face down.

Categories
Selected Articles

Jeanine Pirro tells ‘Pod Force One’ that DC Mayor Bowser is ‘very nice person’ who ‘gets rolled’ by the Left

DC’s top prosecutor, Jeanine Pirro, dished on her surprisingly amicable relationship with Mayor Muriel Bowser, but dinged her for getting “rolled” by the left during an exclusive interview on “Pod Force One.”
Categories
Selected Articles

Fiosrú investigating fatal Cork road incident that occured ‘during a Garda interaction’

The incident occurred around 6pm on Tuesday at Ballyellis, near Mallow. It is understood that a woman was killed in the collision.
Categories
Selected Articles

Armed man who said he was from the IRA while robbing post office jailed for four years

Barry Reddan, a retired motor mechanic, burst into the post office and shouted: ‘Hand the money over, I’m from the IRA. Hand the money over.’
Categories
Selected Articles

Missing Mississippi dog reunited with owners after 5 years

Animal services were able to identify Penny and contact her owners thanks to her microchip.
Categories
Selected Articles

Move aside, Musk-Altman: There’s a new brawl captivating the business world

Elon Musk, Michael Burry, Alex Karp, Sam Altman
Elon Musk, Michael Burry, Alex Karp, and Sam Altman are at the centre of the business world’s biggest feuds right now.

  • The latest beef in the business world is Michael Burry vs. Alex Karp.
  • The investor of “The Big Short” fame revealed he recently bet against Palantir, angering CEO Karp.
  • Their clash speaks to a divide in the business world between AI’s believers and skeptics.

Step aside, Elon Musk vs. Sam Altman. There’s a new beef in the business world, and it centers on the stock market’s biggest question: Is the AI boom a bubble?

Michael Burry of “The Big Short” fame and Palantir CEO Alex Karp have been trading barbs after the investor revealed he bet on Palantir’s stock to plunge last quarter.

The pair’s clash boils down to a fundamental difference in views that’s a microcosm of the market’s big divide.

Burry’s assessment is that AI is a bubble, and the valuations of companies like Palantir are way out of whack. Karp’s perspective is that Palantir is pioneering a technological revolution, its stock gains should be celebrated for enriching everyday Americans, and betting on his company to fail is just plain wrong.

The wider investing community is similarly split between those who say current valuations are justified because AI will change the world, boost productivity, and supercharge economic growth and corporate profits, and those who warn they’re overinflated and destined to burst like the dot-com bubble.

While Musk and Altman are wrestling over OpenAI, Burry and Karp’s dispute hinges on whether AI is worth every billion being thrown at it, or just the latest case of speculative fervor.

The long and short of Burry vs. Karp

The feud began with Burry’s Scion Asset Management disclosing last Monday that at the end of September, it held bearish put options on 5 million Palantir shares and 1 million Nvidia shares, worth a notional $912 million and $187 million, respectively.

Burry had returned to X a few days earlier after a two-year hiatus, posting a cryptic message suggesting AI hype is unsustainable — but so perilous that “the only winning move” is to not get involved.

He later posted an array of charts, book excerpts, and “Star Wars” memes drawing parallels between AI and the dot-com bubble.

Burry’s 13F filing was published on the same day as Palantir’s third-quarter earnings. Shares of the AI-powered data analysis company tumbled as much as 10% the next day, and Karp lashed out at Burry on CNBC.

“As far as I can tell, the two companies he’s shorting are the ones making all the money, which is super weird,” Karp said. “The idea that chips and ontology is what you want to short is batshit crazy.”

Burry fired back on X: “Doesn’t surprise me one bit that Alex Karp and his ‘ontology’ … cannot crack a simple 13F.”

The Scion boss — best known for his massive bet against the mid-2000s housing bubble, which was immortalized in “The Big Short” — was likely nodding to 13Fs being published with a six-week lag, so Karp had no firm reason to think Burry had kept his Palantir and Nvidia puts throughout October and early November.

Burry underscored that point in another X post : “Fake news! I am not 5’6” — meaning he’s not short, physically or in his portfolio.

Palantir stock has surged about 30-fold since the start of 2023, propelling it to a $453 billion market capitalization as of Tuesday’s close. That’s more than 100 times its projected revenue this year.

Burry has doubled down on his bearish AI stance, posting on Monday that so-called hyperscalers such as Meta and Oracle are artificially boosting their earnings by understating the depreciation rates of their computing equipment.

“More detail coming November 25th,” he teased. “Stay tuned.”

Why Musk is sparring with Altman

The other high-profile duel in the AI world right now is, of course, Musk vs. Altman.

Altman and Musk cofounded OpenAI along with two others in 2015. Musk stepped down from OpenAI’s board in 2018, founded rival xAI in 2023, and has filed multiple lawsuits against Altman and OpenAI.

Musk has accused Altman of “stealing” the organization from him, and of abandoning its founding mission by not keeping its code open-source, and by converting it from a nonprofit into a for-profit company.

Altman recently fired back at Musk on X, saying he “helped turn the thing you left for dead into what should be the largest nonprofit ever.”

But there’s an important difference here. While the Altman-Musk split is about competing visions for the future of AI, Karp and Burry disagree over the technology’s true worth — and whether the corporate titans harnessing it are overvalued.

There’s a rich history of investors betting against big companies

Jim Chanos speaks at a conference
Jim Chanos

Burry is just the latest investor to wager that a company will falter and get in a shouting match with its defenders.

Greenlight Capital’s David Einhorn famously shorted Lehman Brothers months before it collapsed in September 2008 and helped trigger a global financial crisis.

In presentations to investors and emails to management, he called out the investment bank’s aggressive accounting and excessive leverage, and said it was putting itself and the financial system at risk by not addressing its problems. He was soon proven right.

Similarly, Jim Chanos of Kynikos Associates spotted red flags at Enron and shorted the energy giant before it filed for bankruptcy in late 2001.

On the other hand, both Einhorn and Chanos have previously shorted Tesla and criticized Musk. Yet the automaker has defied its skeptics to become one of the world’s most valuable companies, with a $1.5 trillion market capitalization.

Both investors have raised similar concerns to Burry about the AI boom. Einhorn recently warned the industry’s spending binge could result in a “tremendous amount of capital destruction,” and said the figures being “thrown around are so extreme that it’s really, really hard to understand them.”

Chanos recently made the same point as Burry about AI companies dragging out depreciation and delivering a “huge boost” to their reported earnings. He warned there could be a reckoning over the returns from their investments in microchips and servers, and both spending and earnings could “collapse” like they did during the dot-com crash and 2008 crisis.

Whether Burry or Karp will be vindicated in their views on the AI boom is an open question. For now, the business world is waiting for the answer.

Read the original article on Business Insider
Categories
Selected Articles

Map Shows All US Strikes on Alleged Drug Boats

Experts, former officials, some lawmakers and international observers have questioned the legality of the strikes.
Categories
Selected Articles

Uber and DoorDash now disclose when algorithms set prices. There’s still one big question.

An Uber Eats gig worker rides a bike along a body of water while wearing a black hat and a green backpack.
A new law in New York requires businesses, including Uber and Lyft, to disclose when they’re using algorithms to set prices.

  • A New York law requires businesses to disclose when they’re using algorithms to determine prices.
  • Uber and DoorDash users started encountering the disclosures on Monday, when the law took effect.
  • The law doesn’t require companies to disclose exactly how the information affects prices.

New Yorkers got a little more visibility this week into when apps like Uber and DoorDash use algorithms to set prices.

The state’s Algorithmic Pricing Disclosure Act took effect on Monday. Under the law, businesses have to tell customers when they are using their personal data, such as where they are and what they’ve purchased in the past, to determine prices.

For some New York residents, the first sign of the new law was a message that popped up on their phone screen while ordering food delivery.

On the DoorDash app, New York users got a notice that the new law “requires that we make the following disclosure because we use information such as your delivery address to calculate distance and fees, and your past orders and favorite stores to provide personalized promotions and/or discounts.”

“This price was set by an algorithm using your personal data,” the disclosure reads.

Uber users in the state may have noticed a similar disclosure on the screen before checkout on the app, although it didn’t cite the new law.

“This price was set by an algorithm using your personal data,” the disclosure reads. “Your location is used to help us calculate fees and savings.”

The notice did not appear in the app when Business Insider used it outside New York. A company spokesperson did not immediately respond to a request for comment about the disclosure.

These new disclosures tell customers when businesses are using algorithms and customer data to determine prices. But exactly how companies like Uber and DoorDash use that information to serve up prices to users, in many cases, remains a mystery.

Uber’s ride-hailing business, for example, has implemented what the company calls upfront pricing over the last few years. The model took the company away from a more predictable rate card for pricing rides and toward a system that uses Uber’s data on past trips and users to determine pricing.

A study conducted earlier this year found that upfront pricing has helped Uber determine the most money that riders are willing to pay for a trip — a tactic that helped the company become profitable, the study said. Uber said in June that its algorithms “do not use information about an individual rider or driver’s personal characteristics” to set prices.

Do you have a story to share about Uber, DoorDash, or another gig-work company? Contact this reporter at abitter@businessinsider.com.

Read the original article on Business Insider
Categories
Selected Articles

Satellite Photos Show Solar-Powered Luxury Resort on Red Sea

Saudi Arabia is beginning to show tangible returns on its multibillion-dollar tourism push.
Categories
Selected Articles

Indian police detain suspects in Kashmir after deadly New Delhi car blast

Eight people were killed in an explosion near the historic Red Fort monument on Monday.