Michael Hayden dares Donald Trump to revoke his security …

Count former CIA and NSA boss Michael V. Hayden among those top former U.S. intelligence officials whod be happy to have President Trump revoke their security clearances, too.

Mr. Hayden made the remarks Sunday on CNN when asked by host Jake Tapper whether he agreed with a column written late last week by retired Adm. William McRaven blasting Mr. Trump for revoking the security clearance of former CIA Director John O. Brennan.

Adm. McRaven said he would consider it an honor to lose his clearance alongside Mr. Brennan so I can add my name to the list of men and women who have spoken up against your presidency.

Mr. Tapper asked Mr. Hayden on Sundays State of the Union program whether he would be similarly honored to have his status ended.

Well, to be included in that group? Sure, he said, going on to name an even more specific reason that Mr. Trump ought to revoke his clearance.

Frankly, if his not revoking my clearance gave the impression that I somehow moved my commentary in a direction more acceptable to the White House, I would find that very disappointing and frankly unacceptable, said Mr. Hayden, who has frequently been critical of Mr. Trump on CNN and other networks.

Mr. Hayden was director of the National Security Agency under Presidents Bill Clinton and George W. Bush and served as CIA director under both Mr. Bush and President Barack Obama.

Mr. Hayden was among more than a dozen former intelligence officials who released a joint statement Thursday night calling Mr. Trumps revocation of Mr. Brennans security clearance ill-considered and merely a reflection of political differences.

More here:

Michael Hayden dares Donald Trump to revoke his security ...

Economists Warn Donald Trump’s Tariffs Wars will Harm US

"}var y='";$("#main_score_strip_top").html(y),set_score_slider_style()}else $("#top_strip_cricket_widget").html(""),"undefined"!=typeof updateTopScoreWidgetNews18&&clearInterval(updateTopScoreWidgetNews18),console.log("no live match in progress")},error:function(e){console.log("error in live score widget"),$("#top_strip_cricket_widget").html("")}})}function get_live_team_scores(e,s,i){var e=get_ipl_teams_short(e),t=s,i=i,a="https://images.news18.com/static_news18/ibnlive/pix/ibnhome/cricketnext/microsite/teamsicon/",r=a+e.toLowerCase()+".png",n='',c=t.length;if(c>0){for(var o=1,v="",l=0;c>l;l++){var m=t[l].scores,p=t[l].wickets,f=t[l].overs,g=t[l].active;if(1==g)var d="",_="";else d="",_="";if(2==o)var b=" & ";else var b="";"test"==i?(v=v+" "+b+d+m+"/"+p+_,o+=1):(v=v+" "+d+m+"/"+p+"("+f+")"+_+b,o+=1)}var h=d+e+_;h='

'+n+h+v+"

AFP

The Trump administration on Thursday is due to impose its latest round of punitive tariffs on China, putting 25 percent duties on another $16 billion in imports, with Beijing poised to retaliate dollar-for-dollar.

Washington, Ottawa and Mexico City began talks a year ago to revise the 24-year-old trade pact, which Trump has threatened to scrap should negotiators fail to reach an acceptable deal. Officials have become more optimistic in recent days that they could finalize a NAFTA rewrite by the end of the year.

Some companies across the United States have blamed the tariffs for layoffs, squeezed profit margins and possible bankruptcies. Lawmakers in Trump's own Republican party have expressed outrage about the multi-front trade conflicts and warned of long-term damage to the economy.

But White House officials say the American economy is more than robust enough to endure the conflict, which they believe will ultimately result in more equitable trade that reduces the US trade deficit.

A majority of those surveyed by NABE approved of December's corporate tax reductions but only a small share favored the changes for individuals, which Democrats have criticized as unduly favorable to the wealthy.

More than 80 percent believed current fiscal policy would expand the budget deficit as a share of GDP, and agreed Congress should work to reduce it.

Large majorities also favored fighting climate change and combating income inequality but were split on how to achieve the latter goal, according to the report.

According to the latest NABE survey, 60 percent of respondents believed economic policy should do more to combat climate change.

In addition, 74 percent said economic policy should do more to combat income inequality but respondents were divided on the best means of doing this: 47 percent supported more education to improve worker productivity, while 33 percent favored more progressive taxation.

Go here to read the rest:

Economists Warn Donald Trump's Tariffs Wars will Harm US

Trump Says Conserving Oil No Longer A Concern As US Becomes …

The Trump administration says the U.S. no longer considers conserving oil economically important as President Donald Trump seeks to weaponize the countrys energy sector against Russia.

The Department of Energy announced the policy shift in a memo in August, The Associated Press reported Sunday. The memo comes after the administration rolled back Obama-era fuel mileage standards the statement also notes the shale boom poised to make the U.S. a top global oil producer.

Booming shale production gives the country more flexibility to use our oil resources with less concern for supply or price shocks, according to DOEs statement. The government still believes in the need to treat energy wisely, the memo adds without clarifying what that entails.

The U.S. is expected to overtake Russia and Saudi Arabia as the world leader in oil and gas production in 2019.

International Energy Agency chief Fatih Birol, for one, recognized the U.S. in January as the undisputed oil and gas producer in the world over the next several decades because of the strong predictions of success of the U.S. oil and gas sector over time.(RELATED: US Quickly Becoming The Undisputed Global Oil And Gas Leader, Says IEA Head)

Europe moving toward American natural gas exports could have implications for Russian President Vladimir Putin, who currentlybenefitsfrom Russian liquefied natural gas (LNG) exports to the EU. Natural gas accounts for over one-third of Russias federal budget revenues, with over 75 percent of its natural gas exports going to Europe in 2016, according to the Energy Information Administration.

Follow Chris White onFacebookandTwitter

See more here:

Trump Says Conserving Oil No Longer A Concern As US Becomes ...

Michael Shannon Explains Why He’d Never Play ‘That F**king …

Actor Michael Shannon frequently plays a villain on the big screen, but theres one role the two-time Oscar nominee wont take.

Shannon told Playboy magazine hell never portray that fucking guy President Donald Trump.

Andrew Kelly / ReutersIn case you were wondering, actor Michael Shannon absolutely, positively would not play Donald Trump in a movie.

Just to get inside his head? interviewer Eric Spitznagel prodded. You talked about being fascinated with bad men who are suffering.

But Shannon, who played Zod in Man of Steel,Nelson Van Alden in HBOs Boardwalk Empire and Col.Richard Strickland in The Shape of Water, said Trump wasnt suffering.

Hes having a blast! Shannon said. Are you fucking kidding me? That guy is having so much fun.

In fact, Shannon said, Trump was having the time of his fucking life.

He doesnt even have to work. All the hard work that most people have to do to get to be president of the United States, he just skipped all that. The fucking guy doesnt even know whats in the Constitution. He doesnt have any grasp of history or politics or law or anything. Hes just blindfolded, throwing darts at the side of a bus.

Shannon said Trump wasnt capable of deep reflection in any form.

It doesnt happen, he said. Fuck that guy. When hes alone with his thoughts, hes not capable of anything more complex than I want some pussy and a cheeseburger. Maybe my wife will blow me if I tell her shes pretty.

After joking that he would play National Security Adviser John Bolton in a Trump movie because of his mustache, Shannon said he hoped no such film was ever made not even one critical of the administration.

My preference would be that it just fade into nonexistence, Shannon said. I wouldnt want to memorialize it or celebrate it in any way.

Shannon, who was nominated for Best Supporting Actor for 2009s Revolutionary Road and 2016s Nocturnal Animals, was similarly dismissive when asked about Trump voters.

Somebody who thinks Trump is doing a good job, theres no conversation to have with that person, he said. I know they say you should reach across the aisle and all that crap, but to me it feels like putting your hand in a fan.

Shannon has shared even harsher comments about Trump voters in the past. Shortly after the 2016 election, he noted that many of the presidents supporters were older.

No offense to the seniors out there. My moms a senior citizen, Shannon told Metro News. But if youre voting for Trump, its time for the urn.

When the interviewer said he was struggling to talk to his own parents who voted for Trump, Shannon offered some pretty blunt advice.

Fuck em, he said. Youre an orphan now. Dont go home. Dont go home for Thanksgiving or Christmas. Dont talk to them at all. Silence speaks volumes.

Shannons latest remarks in the September/October edition of Playboy have not yet been published online, but excerpts posted on Twitter received almost as much praise as his acting:

Go here to see the original:

Michael Shannon Explains Why He'd Never Play 'That F**king ...

When ‘Truth Isn’t Truth’ — Mr. Orwell, Meet Donald Trump’s …

The president's personal lawyer Rudy Giuliani: "Truth isn't truth." (AP Photo/Charles Krupa)

They've been flirting with it for a while, but they've finally crossed the Rubicon and moved firmly into 1984 territory.

I'm referring of course to the dark classic novel by George Orwell, which was written in 1949 and describes "Big Brother" and a future dystopian state characterized by, as Wikipedia accurately describes it, "official deception...brazenly misleading terminology, and manipulation of recorded history." Yep, sound familiar? 'Fraid it does.

What pushed me (and our administration) over the line, I'm sorry to say, and into truly Orwellian territory, was this little exchange today between Rudy Giuliani and NBC's Chuck Todd, as reported by CNN, on Meet The Press.

"When you tell me that, you know, he [Mr. Trump] should testify because he's going to tell the truth and he shouldn't worry, well, that's so silly because it's somebody's version of the truth. Not the truth..."

"Truth is truth," Todd said in response.

"No, no, it isn't truth," Giuliani said. "Truth isn't truth. The president of the United States says, 'I didn't...'"

"Truth isn't truth," Todd interjected. "Mr. Mayor, do you realize, what... I think this is going to become a bad meme."

Got that right. A really bad meme.

The lure of alternative reality

In a way, though, Mr. Giuliani's verbal truth-stretching isn't surprising. No, not surprising at all. Anyone who's watched our president push the boundaries of veracity for the last couple of years has seen an Administration that regards facts mostly as inconvenient data points to be molded as the mood suits.

There's the ever-convenient whipping boy fake news (loosely defined as any news coverage the president dislikes).

There's Kellyanne Conway's now-classic reference to alternative facts.

There's the Washington's Post's ongoing meticulous documentation of the president's "false or misleading claims" (4,229 as of August 1).

There's the president's own recent seriously Orwellian quote, "Stick with us," he told the crowd at a speech in Kansas City, "Don't believe the crap you see from these people, the fake news... What you're seeing and what you're reading is not what's happening."

Think about it. What you're seeing and what you're reading is not what's happening. Sound anything like 1984's"official deception, brazenly misleading terminology, and manipulation of recorded history"?

I could go on and on about this craziness but too much alternative reality makes my head start to hurt. Which I guess is sort of the point. Doublespeak disturbs people. It confuses them. If you're not paying too close attention (which is my problem and why my head is hurting), it wears you down.

4,229 lies (call them what they are) by the Washington Post's careful count, and that was 18 days ago. I usually write about management and I can say with 100% certainty that no CEO of a public company could lie 4,229 times to his or her shareholders and remain in the role. No way, no how, not even close.

But at the end of the day the fact that our president lies frequently doesn't even any longer surprise me, nor does the fact thatMr. Giuliani clownishly enables his client by muddying the waters and publicly confusing these lies. No, what'smore disturbing is that in the face of all this Orwellian doublespeak so many normally decent Republicans in Congress who surely know better remain silent as amoebas and slugs.

Oh well, guess I shouldn't be too surprised by such silence. After all, amoebas and slugs don't have any backbone, they lack a spine.

Read the original:

When 'Truth Isn't Truth' -- Mr. Orwell, Meet Donald Trump's ...

John Brennan threatens to sue Trump over stripped security …

The former CIA director John Brennan is threatening legal action against Donald Trump, after he was summarily stripped of his security clearance in an unprecedented display of presidential pique.

Brennan took to the airways on Sunday on NBCs Meet the Press and made clear that he had no intention of being cowered by Trumps bombshell action to deprive him of access to classified information. The unparalleled move has triggered an equally unparalleled blowback from 13 of the most revered national security figures in the country, who penned a joint letter decrying the move as ill-considered and unprecedented.

The man at the center of the billowing dispute has now substantially upped the ante by stating that he is considering legal action. Brennan said he had been contacted by a number of lawyers and was actively weighing his options.

He told NBC that in his opinion the revoking of his security clearance was Trumps way of trying to scare other existing and former government officials.

I am going to do whatever I can to try and prevent these abuses occurring in the future

It was a clear signal that if you cross him he will use whatever tools he might have at his disposal to punish you, he said.

Brennan called the move an example of Trumps egregious approach to power. He said: I am going to do whatever I can to try and prevent these abuses occurring in the future and if that means going to court I will do that.

While the former CIA director has been busily doubling down on his criticism of Trump, the White House and its supporters in Congress have also been energetically mounting a campaign of character assassination against him.

Richard Burr, the Republican chair of the Senate intelligence committee, began the outpouring last week when he suggested that any comment by Brennan accusing Trump of possible collusion with Russia that had been based on classified information gathered since he left the CIA would constitute an intelligence breach.

When he was CIA director I was very troubled by what I thought was his politicization of the intelligence community

On Sunday, national security adviser John Bolton echoed the claim when he told ABCs This Week: A number of people have commented that [Brennan] couldnt be in the position hes in of criticizing President Trump and his so-called collusion with Russia unless he did use classified information.

Bolton was forced to admit he could point to no specific examples of any such breach. Instead, he further cast aspersions on Brennan by questioning his actions while in office as Barack Obamas final CIA director.

When he was CIA director I was very troubled by his conduct, by statements he made in public and by what I thought was his politicization of the intelligence community, Bolton said, again without offering specifics.

Brennan denied any intelligence breach, saying his criticisms of Trump had been fully based on the reports of a free and open press. He also said: I dont believe Im being political at all Im not a Republican or a Democrat.

The White House appears to be trying to turn the blazing controversy over security clearances away from Trumps unprecedented action and on to Brennans character. To some degree, Brennan has offered Trump a helping hand by seeming to rein back on his most serious charge: that during his joint press conference with the Russian president Vladimir Putin in July, the president acted in a way that was nothing short of treasonous.

On Friday, Brennan said he hadnt intended to say that Trump actually committed treason. He told MSNBCs Rachel Maddow that sometimes my Irish comes out and in my tweets.

On the back of such remarks, Brennan has come under some criticism from even his allies. Former director of national intelligence James Clapper, who was one of the 13 senior figures who signed the letter opposing the removal of Brennans clearance, told CNNs State of the Union his rhetoric have become an issue in and of itself.

He added: John is sort of like a freight train, and hes going to say whats on his mind.

Read the original post:

John Brennan threatens to sue Trump over stripped security ...

Elon Musk Details Excruciating Personal Toll of Tesla …

Elon Musk was at home in Los Angeles, struggling to maintain his composure. This past year has been the most difficult and painful year of my career, he said. It was excruciating.

The year has only gotten more intense for Mr. Musk, the chairman and chief executive of the electric-car maker Tesla, since he abruptly declared on Twitter last week that he hoped to convert the publicly traded company into a private one. The episode kicked off a furor in the markets and within Tesla itself, and he acknowledged on Thursday that he was fraying.

In an hourlong interview with The New York Times, he choked up multiple times, noting that he nearly missed his brothers wedding this summer and spent his birthday holed up in Teslas offices as the company raced to meet elusive production targets on a crucial new model.

Asked if the exhaustion was taking a toll on his physical health, Mr. Musk answered: Its not been great, actually. Ive had friends come by who are really concerned.

[Read about the bizarre subplot involving Mr. Musk and the rapper Azealia Banks.]

The events set in motion by Mr. Musks tweet have ignited a federal investigation and have angered some board members, according to people familiar with the matter. Efforts are underway to find a No. 2 executive to help take some of the pressure off Mr. Musk, people briefed on the search said. And some board members have expressed concern not only about Mr. Musks workload but also about his use of Ambien, two people familiar with the board said.

For two decades, Mr. Musk has been one of Silicon Valleys most brash and ambitious entrepreneurs, helping to found several influential technology companies. He has often carried himself with bravado, dismissing critics and relishing the spotlight that has come with his success and fortune. But in the interview, he demonstrated an extraordinary level of self-reflection and vulnerability, acknowledging that his myriad executive responsibilities are taking a steep personal toll.

In the interview, Mr. Musk provided a detailed timeline of the events leading up to the Twitter postings on Aug. 7 in which he said he was considering taking the company private at $420 a share. He asserted that he had funding secured for such a deal a transaction likely to be worth well over $10 billion.

[Read the five key takeaways from our interview with Elon Musk.]

That morning, Mr. Musk woke up at home with his girlfriend, the musician known as Grimes, and had an early workout. Then he got in a Tesla Model S and drove himself to the airport. En route, Mr. Musk typed his fateful message.

Mr. Musk has said he saw the tweet as an attempt at transparency. He acknowledged Thursday that no one had seen or reviewed it before he posted it.

Teslas shares soared. Investors, analysts and journalists puzzled over the tweet published in the middle of the days official market trading, an unusual time to release major news including the price Mr. Musk cited. He said in the interview that he wanted to offer a roughly 20 percent premium over where the stock had been recently trading, which would have been about $419. He decided to round up to $420 a number that has become code for marijuana in counterculture lore.

It seemed like better karma at $420 than at $419, he said in the interview. But I was not on weed, to be clear. Weed is not helpful for productivity. Theres a reason for the word stoned. You just sit there like a stone on weed.

Mr. Musk reached the airport and flew on a private plane to Nevada, where he spent the day visiting a Tesla battery plant known as the Gigafactory, including time meeting with managers and working on an assembly line. That evening, he flew to the San Francisco Bay Area, where he held Tesla meetings late into the night.

What Mr. Musk meant by funding secured has become an important question. Those two words helped propel Teslas shares higher.

But that funding, it turned out, was far from secure.

Mr. Musk has said he was referring to a potential investment by Saudi Arabias government investment fund. Mr. Musk had extensive talks with representatives of the $250 billion fund about possibly financing a transaction to take Tesla private maybe even in a manner that would have resulted in the Saudis owning most of the company. One of those sessions took place on July 31 at the Tesla factory in the Bay Area, according to a person familiar with the meeting. But the Saudi fund had not committed to provide any cash, two people briefed on the discussions said.

Another possibility under consideration is that SpaceX, Mr. Musks rocket company, would help bankroll the Tesla privatization and would take an ownership stake in the carmaker, according to people familiar with the matter.

Mr. Musks tweet kicked off a chain reaction.

An hour and 20 minutes after the tweet, with Teslas shares up 7 percent, the Nasdaq stock exchange halted trading, and Tesla published a letter to employees from Mr. Musk explaining the rationale for possibly taking the company private. When the shares resumed trading, they continued their climb, ending the day with an 11 percent gain.

The next day, investigators in the San Francisco office of the Securities and Exchange Commission asked Tesla for explanations. Ordinarily, such material information about a public companys plans is laid out in detail after extensive internal preparation and issued through official channels. Board members, blindsided by the chief executives market-moving statement, were angry that they had not been briefed, two people familiar with the matter said. They scrambled to cobble together a public statement trying to defuse a mounting uproar over the seemingly haphazard communication.

Mr. Musk said in the interview that board members had not complained to him about his tweet. I dont recall getting any communications from the board at all, he said. I definitely did not get calls from irate directors.

But shortly after the Times published its interview with Mr. Musk, he added through a Tesla spokeswoman that Antonio Gracias, Teslas lead independent director, had indeed contacted him to discuss the Aug. 7 Twitter post, and that he had agreed not to tweet again about the possible privatization deal unless he had discussed it with the board.

In the interview, Mr. Musk added that he did not regret his Twitter post Why would I? and said he had no plans to stop using the social media platform. Some board members, however, have recently told Mr. Musk that he should lay off Twitter and focus on making cars and launching rockets, according to people familiar with the matter.

[Kara Swisher, a Times opinion columnist, writes that Mr. Musk is deeply human, with all the positive and negative characteristics that suggests.]

The S.E.C. investigation appears to be intensifying rapidly. Just days after the agencys request for information, Teslas board and Mr. Musk received S.E.C. subpoenas, according to a person familiar with the matter. Board members and Mr. Musk are preparing to meet with S.E.C. officials as soon as next week, the person said.

In the interview on Thursday, Mr. Musk alternated between laughter and tears.

He said he had been working up to 120 hours a week recently echoing the reason he cited in a recent public apology to an analyst whom he had berated. In the interview, Mr. Musk said he had not taken more than a week off since 2001, when he was bedridden with malaria.

There were times when I didnt leave the factory for three or four days days when I didnt go outside, he said. This has really come at the expense of seeing my kids. And seeing friends.

Mr. Musk stopped talking, seemingly overcome by emotion.

He turned 47 on June 28, and he said he spent the full 24 hours of his birthday at work. All night no friends, nothing, he said, struggling to get the words out.

Two days later, he was scheduled to be the best man at the wedding of his brother, Kimbal, in Catalonia. Mr. Musk said he flew directly there from the factory, arriving just two hours before the ceremony. Immediately afterward, he got back on the plane and returned straight to Tesla headquarters, where work on the mass-market Model 3 has been all consuming.

Mr. Musk paused again.

I thought the worst of it was over I thought it was, he said. The worst is over from a Tesla operational standpoint. He continued: But from a personal pain standpoint, the worst is yet to come.

He blamed short-sellers investors who bet that Teslas shares will lose value for much of his stress. He said he was bracing for at least a few months of extreme torture from the short-sellers, who are desperately pushing a narrative that will possibly result in Teslas destruction.

Referring to the short-sellers, he added: Theyre not dumb guys, but theyre not supersmart. Theyre O.K. Theyre smartish.

[Short-sellers made $1 billion as Tesla stock dropped 9 percent on Friday.]

Mr. Musks tweets on Aug. 7 were the most recent of several flare-ups that had drawn scrutiny. He wrangled with short-sellers and belittled analysts for asking boring, bonehead questions. And after sending a team of engineers from one of his companies to help rescue members of a stranded soccer team, he lashed out at a cave diver who was dismissive of the gesture, deriding him on Twitter as a pedo guy, or pedophile.

To help sleep when he is not working, Mr. Musk said he sometimes takes Ambien. It is often a choice of no sleep or Ambien, he said.

But this has worried some board members, who have noted that sometimes the drug does not put Mr. Musk to sleep but instead contributes to late-night Twitter sessions, according to a person familiar with the boards thinking. Some board members are also aware that Mr. Musk has on occasion used recreational drugs, according to people familiar with the matter.

Tesla executives have been trying for years to recruit a chief operating officer or other No. 2 executive to assume some of Mr. Musks day-to-day responsibilities, according to people familiar with the matter. A couple of years ago, Mr. Musk said, the company approached Sheryl Sandberg, who is Facebooks second-highest executive, about the job.

Mr. Musk said that to the best of my knowledge, there is no active search right now. But people familiar with the matter said a search is underway, and one person said it had intensified in the wake of Mr. Musks tweets.

[The Tesla board now must ask a sensitive but vital question, our columnist writes. What was Mr. Musks state of mind when he tweeted?]

In response to questions for this article, Tesla provided a statement that it attributed to its board, excluding Elon Musk. There have been many false and irresponsible rumors in the press about the discussions of the Tesla board, the statement said. We would like to make clear that Elons commitment and dedication to Tesla is obvious. Over the past 15 years, Elons leadership of the Tesla team has caused Tesla to grow from a small start-up to having hundreds of thousands of cars on the road that customers love, employing tens of thousands of people around the world, and creating significant shareholder value in the process.

Mr. Musk said he had no plans to relinquish his dual roles as chairman and chief executive.

But, he added, if you have anyone who can do a better job, please let me know. They can have the job. Is there someone who can do the job better? They can have the reins right now.

Andrew Ross Sorkin contributed reporting.

Read more from the original source:

Elon Musk Details Excruciating Personal Toll of Tesla ...

Elon Musk | Biography & Facts | Britannica.com

Elon Musk, (born June 28, 1971, Pretoria, South Africa), South African-born American entrepreneur who cofounded the electronic-payment firm PayPal and formed SpaceX, maker of launch vehicles and spacecraft. He was also one of the first significant investors in, as well as chairman and chief executive officer of, the electric car manufacturer Tesla.

Musk was born to a South African father and a Canadian mother. He displayed an early talent for computers and entrepreneurship. At age 12 he created a video game and sold it to a computer magazine. In 1988, after obtaining a Canadian passport, Musk left South Africa because he was unwilling to support apartheid through compulsory military service and because he sought the greater economic opportunities available in the United States.

Musk attended Queens University in Kingston, Ontario, and in 1992 he transferred to the University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, where he received bachelors degrees in physics and economics in 1995. He enrolled in graduate school in physics at Stanford University in California, but he left after only two days because he felt that the Internet had much more potential to change society than work in physics. That year he founded Zip2, a company that provided maps and business directories to online newspapers. In 1999 Zip2 was bought by the computer manufacturer Compaq for $307 million, and Musk then founded an online financial services company, X.com, which later became PayPal, which specialized in transferring money online. The online auction eBay bought PayPal in 2002 for $1.5 billion.

Musk was long convinced that for life to survive, humanity has to become a multiplanet species. However, he was dissatisfied with the great expense of rocket launchers. In 2002 he founded Space Exploration Technologies (SpaceX) to make more affordable rockets. Its first two rockets were the Falcon 1 (first launched in 2006) and the larger Falcon 9 (first launched in 2010), which were designed to cost much less than competing rockets. A third rocket, the Falcon Heavy (first launched in 2018), was designed to carry 117,000 pounds (53,000 kg) to orbit, nearly twice as much as its largest competitor, the Boeing Companys Delta IV Heavy, for one-third the cost. SpaceX also developed the Dragon spacecraft, which carries supplies to the International Space Station and is designed to carry as many as seven astronauts. Musk sought to reduce the expense of spaceflight by developing a fully reusable rocket that could lift off and return to the pad it launched from. Beginning in 2012, SpaceXs Grasshopper rocket made several short flights to test such technology. In addition to being CEO of SpaceX, Musk was also chief designer in building the Falcon rockets, Dragon, and Grasshopper.

Musk had long been interested in the possibilities of electric cars, and in 2004 he became one of the major funders of Tesla Motors (later renamed Tesla), an electric car company founded by entrepreneurs Martin Eberhard and Marc Tarpenning. In 2006 Tesla introduced its first car, the Roadster, which could travel 245 miles (394 km) on a single charge. Unlike most previous electric vehicles, which Musk thought were stodgy and uninteresting, it was a sports car that could go from 0 to 60 miles (97 km) per hour in less than four seconds. In 2012 Tesla introduced the Model S sedan, which was acclaimed by automotive critics for its performance and design. The company won further praise for its Model X luxury SUV, which went on the market in 2015.

Dissatisfied with the projected cost ($68 billion) of a high-speed rail system in California, Musk in 2013 proposed an alternate faster system, the Hyperloop, a pneumatic tube in which a pod carrying 28 passengers would travel the 350 miles (560 km) between Los Angeles and San Francisco in 35 minutes at a top speed of 760 miles (1,220 km) per hour, nearly the speed of sound. Musk claimed that the Hyperloop would cost only $6 billion and that, with the pods departing every two minutes on average, the system could accommodate the six million people who travel that route every year. However, he stated that, between running SpaceX and Tesla, he could not devote time to the Hyperloops development.

Read more:

Elon Musk | Biography & Facts | Britannica.com

7 Things You Didn’t Know About Redheads – YouTube

There are a bunch of myths out there about redheads: Are they really going extinct? Are they more prone to develop cancer? Trace has all those answers and more.

Read More: Simultaneous purifying selection on the ancestral MC1R allele and positive selection on the melanoma-risk allele V60L in South Europeanshttp://mbe.oxfordjournals.org/content..."In humans, the geographical apportionment of the coding diversity of the pigmentary locus MC1R is, unusually, higher in Eurasians than in Africans."

Are redheads going extinct?http://science.howstuffworks.com/life..."In August 2007, many news organizations reported that redheads or "gingers," as our British and Australian friends call them, would eventually become extinct."

MC1Rhttp://ghr.nlm.nih.gov/gene/MC1R"The MC1R gene provides instructions for making a protein called the melanocortin 1 receptor. This receptor plays an important role in normal pigmentation."

Why Redheads Are at Higher Risk for Melanomahttp://www.livescience.com/39094-redh..."The same genetic mutation that leads to red hair and fair skin may put redheads at risk for skin cancer, a new study suggests."

Redheads may be at higher risk of melanoma even without sunhttp://articles.latimes.com/2012/oct/..."A study on mice suggests that pheomelanin pigment, which gives rise to red hair, is itself a potential trigger for melanoma, the deadliest form of skin cancer."

Why Surgeons Dread Redheadshttp://healthland.time.com/2010/12/10..."As the authors of a recent study published in BMJ attest, society's red-haired members don't always get a fair shake. Hoary stereotypes, such as the idea that redheads are also hot heads, are mixed together with actual physiological differences such as a heightened sensitivity to pain. Now science is getting a better understanding of redheaded physiology than ever before."

'Ginger gene' developed after humans moved to colder climate 50,000 years agohttp://www.telegraph.co.uk/science/sc..."Fair skin and red hair first appeared around the time people settled in Europe and still remains a dominant gene in southern Europeans today, even if they become tanned."

Check out more about the ginger gene on I F#!&king Love Science:http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bfAKoV...

Watch More:Is Anorexia Genetic?:http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TWHqDl...Changing Your Genes:http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=B5DU9l...What Are Sea Monkeys?: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3AZJRp...____________________

DNews is dedicated to satisfying your curiosity and to bringing you mind-bending stories & perspectives you won't find anywhere else! New videos twice daily.

Watch More DNews on TestTube http://testtube.com/dnews

Subscribe now! http://www.youtube.com/subscription_c...

DNews on Twitter http://twitter.com/dnews

Anthony Carboni on Twitter http://twitter.com/acarboni

Laci Green on Twitter http://twitter.com/gogreen18

Trace Dominguez on Twitter http://twitter.com/trace501

DNews on Facebook http://facebook.com/dnews

DNews on Google+ http://gplus.to/dnews

Discovery News http://discoverynews.com

Read more here:

7 Things You Didn't Know About Redheads - YouTube

Creating a Space Force Could Trigger an Off-World Arms Race

A small LED starts flashing in a dark room crowded with server racks, desks, and office chairs. On a glowing wall of monitors, lines of hundreds of tiny dots appear, mapping out the trajectory of a satellite currently orbiting the Earth. “It’s Kanopus-V-IK again,” mumbles a bored Space Force surveillance specialist. “It’s getting too close for my liking. Should we engage the jammer again?”

We don’t know what war in space will be like. But chances are, it won’t be like “Star Wars” — it’ll be more like that.

Outer space is no longer a mysterious place onto which we can map our aspirations. It’s never been cheaper and easier to launch a satellite into space. But in our effort to improve life on Earth and observe what we can of the cosmos, we’ve littered the space around our planet with growing quantities of junk.

The space surrounding Earth is getting so crowded that countries like the U.S., Russia, and China are starting to wonder who it will actually end up belonging to, and what they’ll have to do to keep control over it (yes, we have outer space treaties saying that it belongs to everyone, but who cares).

Countries are starting to wonder who will actually own space, and what they’ll have to do to keep control over it.

And so, the idea of the Space Force was born.

“Space is a war-fighting domain, just like the land, air and sea,” President Donald Trump told an audience of Marines in March.

Despite questionable support and even more questionable funding (the Space Force didn’t make it into Congress’ 2019 defense spending bill), President Trump seems dead set on making the Space Force a thing.

For international relations, the creation of the world’s first Space Force might be a disaster. It sets the stage for what some are already referring to as the “space arms race.”

Space Force all the way!

— Donald J. Trump (@realDonaldTrump) August 9, 2018

The U.S. has been obsessing over how to militarize space since at least the Cold War.  For instance, “Rods from God” or Project Thor was a conceptual weapon inspired by 1950s science fiction that would fling tungsten rods from outer space at ludicrous speeds at unsuspecting enemies on Earth below. According to Popular Science, this unhinged concept resurfaced in an official Air Force document from 2003, referencing “hypervelocity rod bundles” in its list of possible space-based weapons.

Luckily, space weapon systems like that never actually materialized (and still seem pretty ludicrous to us now). Space warfare in the 21st century looks pretty different — covertly launched satellites jam military GPS signals, and carry out reconnaissance missions using ultra-high resolution cameras, while troops prepare for on-the-ground attacks using satellite-based positioning systems.

There’d be no pew-pew handheld laser guns shot at individuals inside gleaming white spacecraft, no fighter jets and death stars. Instead, the Space Force is more likely to involve engineers clicking away at lots of screens.

But details on what a Space Force will actually look like, or even do, are scant. In a speech earlier this month, Vice President Mike Pence a four action plan to establish the Space Force, including the creation of a Space Command and an Operations Force made up of high-ranking military experts. Pence, however, didn’t outline what the Space Force would do that the Air Force, or NASA, doesn’t do already, or how will we pay for it.

There’d be no pew-pew handheld laser guns shot at individuals inside gleaming white spacecraft, no fighter jets and death stars.

Despite the seemingly comical vagueness of this plan, a Space Force, should one actually be created, would address some real concerns.

Top of the list: protecting U.S. satellites. Recent reports suggest that Russia and China are developing space weapons designed to monitor and even take out U.S. military satellites. That could bring other American military operations to their knees — 800 U.S. satellites are in orbit, many of which provide the Pentagon with intelligence and communication networks and GPS — and they weren’t exactly built to protect themselves in case of an attack. Spy satellites could collect valuable information from the enemy by scanning the ground, or interfere with signals from other satellites. In the most extreme cases, they could take down other satellites.

Without a stronger U.S. military presence in space, China and Russia will have ways to “interdict satellites both from a ground standpoint and from a space standpoint,” Director of the Defense Intelligence Agency Robert Ashley said at a Summit in Washington, according to Defense One. “The technology is being developed right now. It is coming in the near future.”

Ashley is right — the satellite fight is already heating up. In 2014, personnel at an undisclosed Air Force base rang the alarm bells when they discovered that Russian “Kamikaze” satellites (formally known as Kosmos 2499) were orbiting dauntingly close to U.S. deployed satellites. The sheer proximity made them worry that the Russian satellites could take out the American ones.

Then there was the time in January 2007 when Chinese ballistic missiles intentionally blew up one of the country’s own outdated weather satellites into thousands of pieces of metal, as Wired reports. Strategic Command forces in Nebraska were shocked — being able to shoot a missile at a target moving faster than the Earth’s orbit in outer space could lead to much more drastic action. Perhaps the government was testing out an anti-satellite rocket?

The U.S. military isn’t taking the threat lightly. “Not surprisingly, nations are now actively testing methods to deny us continued use of space services during conflict,” William Shelton, former commander of the U.S. Air Force Space Command, told a House Armed Services Subcommittee in March 2017, CNBC reports.

Image Credit: Emily Cho

Now, proponents of Trump’s Space Force use the threat of other nations attacking satellites to legitimize its creation. “We are not initiating this. We are saying we will be able to defend our satellites in space. At the same time, if someone is going to try to engage in space with military means, we will not stand idly by,” U.S. Defense Secretary James Mattis told an audience during a trip to Brazil, as quoted by ABC News.

For the average person, though, there’s not much to worry about. A satellite probably wouldn’t fall on anyone’s head — more likely, radars, positioning systems, and telecommunication networks would collapse. We’d have a hard time getting around, but except for some International Space Station astronauts afraid of getting shredded by ballistic satellite bits, we’d be pretty safe.

But before the Space Force can shoot down any satellites at all, we’ll have to embark upon the long and tedious process of creating it. Shifting the responsibilities of thousands of military personnel, as Pence suggested, could take a very long time, and that’s only going to happen once the funds are nailed down and approved. And there’s no telling when that might be — Space Force could end up costing U.S. taxpayers an astronomical amount of money, which could make it a pretty tough sell for Congress.

The booming private spaceflight industry could help speed this up. Decades of government investment has allowed companies like SpaceX and Boeing to advance spaceflight technology so much that launching cargo into space has become a whole lot cheaper. So when the Space Force wants to, say, launch a satellite to combat the (very real, or, you know, not) threats to U.S. dominance in space, it’ll cost it a whole lot less to do so.

Not everyone is on board with the Space Force, of course. By allocating funds to a Space Force, the Trump administration is showing Americans what it values — security, ensuring American global dominance — and what it doesn’t — pressing human problems like restoring electricity to hurricane-ravaged Puerto Rico or bringing clean water to Flint, Michigan.

In truth, we have no idea what space wars of the future will look like. But establishing a Space Force is sure to bring about that future more quickly. By amplifying mistrust between nations — will the next person to touch down on the Moon try to claim territory? — the Trump administration is quashing the kind of exploration and innovation that enabled us to have a Space Force in the first place.

The post Creating a Space Force Could Trigger an Off-World Arms Race appeared first on Futurism.

Excerpt from:
Creating a Space Force Could Trigger an Off-World Arms Race

You Can Now Buy The World’s First Graphene Jacket, And It’s Everything You Want It To Be

Apparel startup Vollebak is selling a $695 graphene jacket that can conduct and retain heat, repel bacteria, and decrease humidity.

A WEARABLE SUPERMATERIAL. Apparel startup Vollebak’s latest offering isn’t exactly something you’d find at your local mall: The company just released the world’s first graphene jacket.

Graphene is a one-atom thick, transparent layer of carbon first isolated in 2004. It’s the strongest material ever discovered, extremely flexible, and highly conductive. And now, you can wear it on your body.

A GRAPPLING HOOK SHORT OF A BATSUIT. Vollebak constructed its $695 (!) reversible jacket from a high-stretch nylon coated on one side with a layer of graphene. The benefits of this graphene coating depend on how a person wears the jacket. If they leave the jacket somewhere warm and then wear it with the graphene facing inward, it warms their body. It can also redistribute heat from warmer parts of the body to cooler parts.

The graphene material also produces less humidity next to the skin than other materials, so you won’t feel as sticky and uncomfortable if you sweat while wearing the jacket. Bacteria can’t grow on graphene, and the jacket is both waterproof and breathable, so while water can’t permeate it, sweat can evaporate out of it, according to Vollebak’s website.

14 YEARS IN THE MAKING. We’ve been hearing about the wonders of graphene for about 14 years now, but the supermaterial has yet to make any sort of super impact on our daily lives. That’s because it’s difficult to work with and expensive to produce. Vollebak co-founder Nick Tidball is hopeful that the company’s jacket will set graphene down the path toward the mainstream.

“By releasing the graphene jackets out into the world as experimental prototypes, our aim is to open up our R&D process and accelerate discovery by finally getting graphene out of the research labs and into the field,” he told Fast Company.

For now, anyone with $695 can buy the jacket on Vollebak’s website. The company hopes that many customers will experiment on the jacket, in the process stumbling across features that no one has discovered yet.

If you just want something to wear during for your morning runs, though, you could probably find something cheaper than one made with the world’s most exciting supermaterial.

READ MORE: The First Graphene Jacket Is Here, and It’s Magical [Fast Company]

More on graphene: Five Ways Graphene Could Transform Our World

The post You Can Now Buy The World’s First Graphene Jacket, And It’s Everything You Want It To Be appeared first on Futurism.

The rest is here:
You Can Now Buy The World’s First Graphene Jacket, And It’s Everything You Want It To Be

To Detect Bombs Efficiently and Cheaply, Try Using Wi-Fi

Researchers have created a Wi-Fi weapon detection system that is both cheap and accurate at identifying bombs, explosives, and other weapons.

WI-FI FOR GOOD. You probably use Wi-Fi on the regular to connect your smartphone, computer, or other electronic device to the glory of the world wide web. But soon, that same technology could also keep you safe in real-life public areas.

According to a peer-reviewed study led by researchers from Rutgers University-New Brunswick, ordinary Wi-Fi can effectively and cheaply detect weapons, bombs, or explosive chemicals contained within bags.

The study earned the researchers a best paper award at the 2018 IEEE Conference on Communications and Network Security, which focused solely on cybersecurity.

DETECTING DANGER. According to the researchers’ paper, most dangerous objects contain metals or liquids. Those materials interfere with Wi-Fi signals in a way that researchers can detect. And the baggage a person might use to contain a bomb, weapon, or explosive device is typically made of materials — paper or fiber, often — through which Wi-Fi signals pass easily.

For their study, the researchers built a Wi-Fi weapon detection system that could analyze what happened to Wi-Fi signals as they encountered a nearby object or material. When they tested their system on 15 types of objects and six types of bags, they found that it could distinguish dangerous objects from non-dangerous ones 99 percent of the time. It could identify 90 percent of dangerous materials, accurately identifying metals 98 percent of the time, and liquids 95 percent of the time.

The bag the object was in presented another variable. If the object was in a standard backpack, the system could detect that object with a 95 percent accuracy rate. If it was wrapped in something else before being put in the bag, though, that figure dropped to 90 percent.

PUBLIC SAFETY. Currently, most airports in the U.S. use X-ray or CT scanning technology to check luggage for suspicious items. These instruments are expensive and hard to implement in large public areas. So many security teams in public venues have to rely on manual bag checks, even though they aren’t always as effective.

“In large public areas, it’s hard to set up expensive screening infrastructure like what’s in airports,” study co-author Yingying (Jennifer) Chen said in a press release. “Manpower is always needed to check bags, and we wanted to develop a complementary method to try to reduce manpower.”

For now, the team plans to focus on improving the accuracy of its Wi-Fi weapon detection system so that it can better detect an object’s shape, and modifying it to estimate the volume of liquids contained within bags. Eventually, it could become a standard security measure at festivals, sporting events, and other potential targets for terrorism.

READ MORE: Wi-Fi Could Be Used to Detect Weapons and Bombs [BBC]

More on airport security: Nobody Likes Airport Security, Here’s How AI and Video Can Fix That

The post To Detect Bombs Efficiently and Cheaply, Try Using Wi-Fi appeared first on Futurism.

Link:
To Detect Bombs Efficiently and Cheaply, Try Using Wi-Fi

Want To Snag A Job Mining Asteroids Someday? You Can Now Get Your Masters In It.

A Colorado university just launched the world's first space resources degrees, which are designed to prepare students for off-world mining.

ASTEROIDS APLENTY. Our solar system has no shortage of asteroids. At last count, NASA estimated there were 781,454 of the rocky bodies orbiting our Sun. Tens of thousands of those are floating between the orbits of Mars and Jupiter in an area appropriately named the asteroid belt.

Right now, asteroids kind of just do their own thing — we really only worry about them if they head toward the Earth or threaten one of our spacecraft. But our relationship with asteroids is set to change dramatically in the coming years. A university in Colorado plans to help us get ready for that — it recently launched the world’s first space resources program.

MONEY WAITING TO BE MINED. Just like Earth, asteroids are laced with valuable raw materials, everything from gold and silver to cobalt and titanium. A single asteroid discovered in 1852 contains an estimated $10,000 quadrillion worth of iron; if we extracted all the materials from the asteroids in the asteroid belt, NASA believes we could give every human on Earth $100 billion.

A number of private companies and government agencies are already positioning themselves to grab the biggest possible slice of the asteroid mining pie, but asteroid mining is about as easy as it sounds (i.e., not easy at all). That’s where the Colorado School of Mines’ new space resources program comes in.

A PIONEERING PROGRAM. According to the school’s website, the goal of the program is to prepare today’s scientists, engineers, entrepreneurs, economists, and policy makers for jobs in the burgeoning space resources industry. The school is offering students their choice of a Post-Baccalaureate certificate, a Master of Science degree, or a PhD, all of which focus on the “exploration, extraction, and use of [space] resources.”

The Colorado School of Mines is a particularly appropriate university to help prepare tomorrow’s space resources experts. According to the program’s website, “The broad topic of space resources brings together many fields in which Mines has a strong presence, including remote sensing, geomechanics, mining, materials/metallurgy, robotics/automation, advanced manufacturing, electrochemistry, solar and nuclear energy, and resource economics.”

Given all the resources space has to offer, it’s probably only a matter of time before humans try to extract them. The Colorado School of Mines’ space resources program could be the first of many like it that would ensure the pioneers of this new industry are well-equipped to meet its challenges.

READ MORE: School of Mines Debuts the World’s First Degree Program for Space Mining [Colorado Public Radio]

More on asteroid mining: NASA Is Fast-Tracking Plans to Explore a Metal Asteroid Worth $10,000 Quadrillion

The post Want To Snag A Job Mining Asteroids Someday? You Can Now Get Your Masters In It. appeared first on Futurism.

Read the original here:
Want To Snag A Job Mining Asteroids Someday? You Can Now Get Your Masters In It.

The Boring Company Plans to Drill a Tunnel to Dodger Stadium

Elon Musk's Boring Company announces the Dugout Loop, an underground tunnel designed to ferry passengers to and from LA's Dodger Stadium.

THE DUGOUT LOOP. For a fan of the Los Angeles Dodgers, the only thing worse than watching the baseball team lose might be the drive to and from Dodger Stadium. LA traffic is often a nightmare anyway, but when fans swarm in and out of the 56,000-capacity stadium on game day, it truly reaches a new level.

Now, LA local Elon Musk has a plan to help with Dodger Stadium’s traffic problem: the Dugout Loop.

BELOW THE TRAFFIC. On Wednesday, Musk’s Boring Company announced the Dugout Loop via a tweet that included a link to the project on the company’s website. According to the site, the Dugout Loop will feature a single underground tunnel that connects Dodger Stadium to one of three LA neighborhoods: Los Feliz, East Hollywood, or Rampart Village.

Passengers will travel through the tunnel on one of about 100 autonomous electric “skates,” each of which can carry between 8 and 16 passengers. The pod-like skates will lower into the tunnel via lifts, and then zip along at speeds between 201 and 241 km/h (125 and 150 mph) to travel the tunnel’s 5.8 kilometers (3.6 miles) in 4 minutes.

Passengers will be able to reserve a spot on a skate via an app (sort of like how you might reserve a movie ticket), and a one-way trip on the Dugout Loop will cost around $1. The Boring Company expects the project will take fewer than 14 months to complete.

FROM TWITTER TO REALITY. As Elon Musk recently learned the hard way, tweeting a plan and actually bringing it to fruition are two very different things. However, the Boring Company does have a couple of things working in its favor.

First, it doesn’t need to worry about raising funds for the Dugout Loop — the company plans to pay for the project on its own. Second, the proposed route only travels below property owned by the Boring Company or public land, and the project already has the (tweeted) support of LA Mayor Eric Garcetti.

Initially, the Boring Company predicts the Dugout Loop will be able to transport roughly 1,400 people per event, but eventually, that could increase to 2,800 people. As for the other tens of thousands of people traveling to and from Dodger Stadium? Well, they’ll just have to deal with the traffic.

READ MORE: Elon Musk’s Boring Company Plans to Dig a Tunnel to Dodger Stadium [WIRED]

More on the Boring Company: Miss Elon Musk’s Boring Company Update? Here’s What You Need to Know

The post The Boring Company Plans to Drill a Tunnel to Dodger Stadium appeared first on Futurism.

Link:
The Boring Company Plans to Drill a Tunnel to Dodger Stadium

What’s A Stablecoin? The Most Stable Cryptocurrencies, Explained [Sponsored]

The words ‘cryptocurrency’ and ‘volatility’ never seem to be too far away from each other these days. Bitcoin’s famously (or rather, infamously) volatile valuation is the very thing that has drawn and repulsed so many to-and-from the crypto space.

Those who take one look at the cryptosphere and run in the other direction are justified — bitcoin’s unbelievable slide from roughy $20,000 a pop to its current valuation of around $6,400 [at the time of writing] is enough to give anyone pause. However, abandoning cryptocurrency completely also means letting go of all its technological features: decentralization, anonymity, and security.

The fact is that not all cryptocurrencies are volatile. In fact, some have been designed specifically to not be volatile at all. Instead, their value is fixed in essentially the same way that most fiat currencies are fixed. These are called ‘stablecoins.’

Because stablecoins do not have volatile valuations, they aren’t for speculative investment. Stablecoins provide the benefits of blockchain-based cryptocurrencies without the volatility. In theory, they can be used to quickly and cheaply to send cross-border payments, store value, and pay for everyday transactions.

Stablecoins have been proposed for use by governments all over the world — the Swiss e-Kroner, the Estonian Estcoin, and the Russian CryptoRuble have all appeared on the radar over the last year.

StableCoins Are Set to Act as An Essential Building Block for the Internet of Value

If implemented on a widespread scale, stablecoins could have the ability to become an essential part of the so-called ‘Internet of Value,’ a global financial network in which value can be exchanged just as quickly as information flows on the internet.

Stablecoins are collateralized, meaning that they get their value from being ‘pegged’ to another asset. There are three kinds of stablecoins tied to three separate classes of assets:

  1. Fiat-pegged currencies. These are tied to fiat-currencies, like the US dollar, on a one-to-one basis. This is the most common kind of stable coin.
  2. Crypto-pegged stablecoins. These are coins that represent deposits of cryptocurrency; in this case, each of the deposits needs to be more valuable than the value of the stablecoins in order to prevent losses.
  3. Stablecoins that aren’t pegged to any assets at all. These stablecoins are the most volatile, as their worth depends on the expectation that their value won’t deteriorate.

One of the more well-known stablecoins on the market is Tether, a fiat-pegged currency that claims to have $1 in the bank for every 1 USDT (‘Tether dollar’).

However, the company has come under fire for its chronic lack of transparency — Tether has not managed to produce an official audit of its funds in over a year, resulting in widespread suspicions that the company didn’t actually have enough money in the bank to back each USDT with $1.

Things got even more suspicious when conspiracy theories spread that Tether dollars had been created to falsely prop up the price of bitcoin. Results of a study conducted at the University of Texas later suggested that this theory may have been uncomfortably close to the truth.

Despite a growing number of accusations against Tether, the coin remained the default stablecoin in the cryptosphere due to a lack of a viable competitor. This began to change with the emergence of TrueUSD (TUSD), which was launched by decentralized tokenization platform TrustToken in early 2018.

TrustToken is a platform by which users can tokenize ‘real-world’ currencies and assets, like yen and real estate. The cryptocurrency was specifically “designed to meet the needs of high-volume individuals and institutions,” according to a blog post by TrustToken.

Escrow Provides TrueUSD Users With Familiarity and Transparency

Practically, this means that TrueUSD’s legal structure has been formed around a tool that high-volume crypto traders and institutional investors are already familiar with: escrow accounts. While TrustToken acknowledges in a blog post that escrow may not be “the endgame for decentralized money and tokenized asset management,” the company believes that “the trust and escrow industry already work well for the management and distribution of assets.”

This is because users can exchange directly with escrow accounts, rather than relying on a network’s protocol to exchange their tokens or dealing with “hidden bank accounts.” TrueUSD never actually directly interacts with or holds its users funds. Escrow accounts also grant token holders access to complete legal protection.

TrueUSD has a heavy focus on legal compliance and transparency, and regularly publishes third-party attestations.

TrustToken’s legal counsel has also provided a memorandum explicitly stating that TrueUSD tokens are not securities, an important consideration in the ever-changing regulatory landscape when it comes to cryptocurrency. “They are more akin to deposit & safekeeping receipts, which the SEC has previously analyzed and recommended no enforcement actions for their use,” notes the blog post.

Democratizing Liquidity

At this moment in time, stablecoins are the most significant means by money flows throughout the cryptosphere. They provide a bridge between exchanges when fiat currencies cannot be moved directly between them.

This is because in order to transfer USD from one exchange to another, an investor must withdraw a re-deposit funds, a process that can involve multiple KYC checks and high fees. Using an unpegged cryptocurrency like bitcoin presents an entirely different set of problems—most significantly, the fact that deep fluctuations in value on a daily basis make it impossible for users to know what their funds will be worth hours after they send them.

TrueUSD essentially makes both sets of these issues disappear, eliminating the on-boarding and off-boarding processes involved with transferring between exchanges, as well as the risk of losing value when using crypto as a tool for transference or store-of-value.

While TrueUSD is well-suited to high-volume and institutional investors, any trader of any size can use the cryptocurrency—including traders whose home economies may be increasingly reliant on financial instruments like TrueUSD as a means to securely store their savings.

“The market has demonstrated that there is strong demand for a trustworthy trading pair between cryptocurrencies and U.S. Dollars,” said Danny An, co-founder and CEO of TrustToken, to Bitcoin Magazine. While TrueUSD is still relatively new to the cryptosphere, it has already begun establishing itself as this trustworthy trading pair. Let’s see what the future will hold for this young currency.


The preceding communication has been paid for by TrustToken. This communication is for informational purposes only and does not constitute an offer or solicitation to sell shares or securities in TrustToken or any related or associated company. None of the information presented herein is intended to form the basis for any investment decision, and no specific recommendations are intended. This communication does not constitute investment advice or solicitation for investment. Futurism expressly disclaims any and all responsibility for any direct or consequential loss or damage of any kind whatsoever arising directly or indirectly from: (i) reliance on any information contained herein, (ii) any error, omission or inaccuracy in any such information or (iii) any action resulting from such information.

This post does not reflect the views or the endorsement of the Futurism.com editorial staff.

The post What’s A Stablecoin? The Most Stable Cryptocurrencies, Explained [Sponsored] appeared first on Futurism.

See the original post:
What’s A Stablecoin? The Most Stable Cryptocurrencies, Explained [Sponsored]

A Mean Robot Supervisor Could Make You a Better-Performing Employee

In a new study, people performed better at a cognitive task when a robot supervisor was in the room — but only if the robot was mean.

A NEW TWIST ON AN OLD TEST. People are likely to perform better cognitively when under the supervision of a “mean” robot than a “nice” one, according to a study published in Science Robotics on Wednesday.

For their study, the researchers asked 58 young adults to complete the Stroop task, a psychological experiment in which a person sees a word and must state the color of the font. This can be challenging when what the word says and the color it’s written in diverge (for example, when the word “green” appears in a red font). Years of psychology studies have shown that  people are better at the test when they’re under stress, either from competitors or simply a human supervisor.

The researchers had the young adults complete the Stroop task twice. The first time, they performed it alone. The second time, they either completed it alone again or with a humanoid robot supervisor in the room.

The participants, it turns out, already had feelings about the robot, because they had hung out with it before the test started. In some cases, this prior interaction was positive — the robot was nice and empathetic, pointing out nice similarities between the participant and the robot (example: three things they have in common? Robot says: “We have arms, two eyes and we are both nice.”). In other instances, the interaction was negative — the robot was contemptuous, lacked empathy, and even made negative comments about the participant’s intelligence.

While the supervised participants completed the task, the robot boss stood off to the side, just within their peripheral vision. Researchers controlled the robot’s motions remotely during the task (for example, instructing it to tilt its head toward the volunteer), and these motions were identical for each participant.

UNDER PRESSURE. When volunteers completed the task under the gaze of the pleasant robot supervisor, their performance didn’t improve at all. However, when the “mean” robot was watching, the volunteers’ performance “improved notably,” about the same as in previous Stroop experiments with human supervisors, the study authors note.

According to the study, this could mean that the presence of a less-than-friendly robot can increase a person’s level of alertness as much as a human supervisor can. It’s another datapoint to inform the confusing, sometimes inconsistent ways that humans interact with, and can feel pressured by, our robot brethren.

So, while you might not welcome the idea of your next boss being a bot and not a fellow human, if they’re mean enough, they might help you perform better at work. Then, who knows? Maybe you’ll work you way up to being the robot’s boss.

READ MORE: Replacing Your Boss With a Cruel Robot Could Make You Concentrate More [NewScientist]

More on humanoid robots: Market for Humanoid Robots Set to Grow Ten Times by 2023

The post A Mean Robot Supervisor Could Make You a Better-Performing Employee appeared first on Futurism.

Original post:
A Mean Robot Supervisor Could Make You a Better-Performing Employee

Tesla’s Investors Make the Company. They May Also Ruin Its CEO.

In an interview with the New York Times, Elon Musk appeared to be often

Elon Musk is unraveling before our very eyes. The sleepless nights he’s spent at the Tesla Gigafactory operating woefully behind schedule; his rather unpredictable behavior on Twitter that’s brought him, and his company, under federal scrutiny. It’s all making the CEO of one of the world’s most innovative car companies more of a liability than an asset.

Musk is giving us a better picture of the toll this has all taken on him. In a recent interview with the New York Times, Musk was frequently “choked up” when he told reporters about how his personal life has suffered because of his (admittedly ambitious) work. “There were times when I didn’t leave the factory for three or four days — days when I didn’t go outside,” he tells reporters over an hour long call. “This has really come at the expense of seeing my kids. And seeing friends.” And he’s still not getting enough sleep. “It is often a choice of no sleep or Ambien.”

The interview comes after a very rough couple of weeks for both Musk and his electric car company. To recap, Musk tweeted about plans for taking Tesla private at $420 a share (about a 20 percent bump over stock prices at the time), with “funding secured.”

That funding was supposed to come from a Saudi Arabian sovereign wealth fund, but Reuters revealed that the funding was anything but secure — the Saudis have “shown no interest so far in financing Tesla Inc,” despite acquiring a 5 percent stake earlier this year.

To add to Musk’s troubles, his rash tweets — that even surprised the company’s board and made stocks go crazy before they were frozen — landed him in hot water with the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission, which is formally investigating whether Musk manipulated markets illegally.

Musk, though, pointed to a single source of all his suffering: it’s the short sellers. You may have heard of “buy low, sell high.” In short-selling, you are reversing this approach in day trading — you sell high and buy low. You borrow shares through a broker to sell high, then buying them back after the stock price falls. It only works when a company’s stock falls, though. So short-sellers only benefit when the company — and Musk himself — fails.

In his Times interview, Musk says he’s been suffering “at least a few months of extreme torture from the short-sellers, who are desperately pushing a narrative that will possibly result in Tesla’s destruction.”

Short-sellers have long been a thorn in Musk’s side. It’s not clear why they’re bothering Musk now more than before, but it might be because Tesla’s difficult year (Model 3 production delays and Model X crash that has dropped stock prices since March) made more short-sellers turn to Tesla, or because Musk’s own activities (say, a positive quarterly earnings call) have cost the short-sellers huge sums. And his often emotional response to short-sellers hasn’t encouraged them to back off.

Musk isn’t taking their attacks sitting down, though. Taking Tesla private would finally put an end to short-sellers — you can’t freely sell and buy private company stock — and allow Musk to finally get some much needed sleep.

But it’s not clear that Tesla will privatize anytime soon, and it won’t be easy if it does happen — the sheer uncertainty and SEC investigation are bound to scare off investors.

One way to pull it off? Hiring number two executive who could take some of that pressure off of his shoulders. An unstable Musk who “alternated between laughter and tears” might not be the most attractive to investors. But an even-keeled, level-headed, well-rested number two could help Musk.

While Musk says there’s “no active search right now” according to the interview, Tesla has tried to poach high-ranking executives in the past, including Facebook’s chief operating officer Sheryl Sandberg.

For now, it looks like Musk is staying in his job, despite speculation earlier this year that he’d be ousted (and, apparently, his own desire to leave): “If you have anyone who can do a better job, please let me know. They can have the job. Is there someone who can do the job better? They can have the reins right now,” Musk tells the Times.

But there are other ways Musk could rest easier at night. He could care less about those pesky short-sellers. Or he could heed the Tesla board and stop tweeting.

The post Tesla’s Investors Make the Company. They May Also Ruin Its CEO. appeared first on Futurism.

Original post:
Tesla’s Investors Make the Company. They May Also Ruin Its CEO.