Author: openjargon

• Uber and Lyft drivers struggle with inconsistent tipping despite efforts to improve service.
• Drivers are trying new strategies such as offering cold water or investing in carwash subscriptions.
• Some drivers told BI that they feel like their attempts to improve the ride experience go unnoticed.

Christina, an Uber and Lyft driver in Las Vegas, said about half of her passengers tip on a good day. But she feels tipping is inconsistent and that sometimes her efforts to please customers go unnoticed.

She keeps a clean car, has a bubbly personality, and tries to connect with passengers by asking questions, she told Business Insider. But she's not always super talkative. When she looks in the mirror and sees a passenger on their phone, she takes that as a cue to stay quiet.

"I think when a customer feels closer to you as a person — that they could see themselves in the position of the driver — then they are more likely to tip," said Christina, who asked to use her first name for fear of professional repercussions. "However that still doesn't guarantee a tip because I've had fantastic rides and conversations, and they give me a compliment but no money."

When her mother was dying a few years ago, Christina sometimes mentioned it in conversation, which drove up tips. Still, she sometimes sees herself having to fight for tips. Some riders have told her they don't know how to tip, forcing her to show them on the app. Some international passengers don't tip, she said, because they don't understand tipping culture. And others don't view driving as a legitimate job compared to other service roles.

Christina isn't alone. Drivers, riders, and gig economy experts told BI that historical tipping norms, rising fares, inconsistent driver service and the fact that Uber originally launched without a tipping feature could be contributing to lower tips. However, while many drivers are testing new strategies to increase the frequency of receiving tips, others are giving up. Some told BI they've stopped going the extra mile because their prior efforts rarely paid off.

"While tipping culture in restaurants is fairly well-established in the United States at this point, it's still evolving when it comes to rideshares, and many riders may not understand the financial realities of rideshare driving," Nick Leighton, an etiquette expert and co-host of the podcast Were You Raised By Wolves, told Business Insider via email."This may explain why there's so much inconsistency currently in when or how much riders choose to tip."

Ride-hailing drivers told Business Insider that customer tips are hard to come by. An analysis of over 500,000 US gig drivers provided to BI by Gridwise, a data-analytics company that helps drivers track their earnings, found that 28% of Uber and Lyft trips got tips in the first half of this year, compared to over 70% of food-delivery and grocery trips.

To be sure, some drivers have fared better when it comes to securing customer tips. In the second half of 2023, Lyft said the median US driver earned about $31 per hour of engaged time — en route to pick up a passenger or had one in their vehicle. The company said these earnings included a median tip of $2.41 per engaged hour.

Meanwhile, an Uber spokesperson told BI in May that across the US, drivers are "earning more than $30 an hour while engaged on the app." Uber said that over the last four years, ride-hailing tipping frequency and the average tip size have roughly doubled — adding that the average ride-hailing tip amount rose nearly 10% over the past six months.

Nine ride-hailing drivers shared what strategies have helped them land tips and why sometimes providing good service is not worth the effort. Some drivers requested partial anonymity due to fear of professional repercussions.

How drivers try to maximize tips

Stuart R., 55, recently stopped driving for Uber and Lyft. He reluctantly returned to work in IT, as he struggled to make ends meet driving full-time. Still, he said tips helped him stay afloat after burning out from his previous job.

He maintained a 4.99 driver rating in Austin and said he frequently got tips for simple things such as greeting passengers, assisting with luggage, and keeping his car "immaculately" clean. He found he got better tips when he practiced "safe humor," or joking with passengers without mentioning politics.

Additionally, he had signage hanging from headrests noting that tips were greatly appreciated. Still, he said, even keeping cool water on hot days or engaging in deep conversations with passengers was never a guarantee of a tip.

Being helpful to tourists has been an effective strategy for Marilyn Cassady, a five-star Uber and Lyft driver in Myrtle Beach, South Carolina, who drives a few days a week to supplement her Social Security income. She said she gets tips for nearly 50% of her rides. Cassady said female passengers are often relieved to have a female driver and tip more. Still, she acknowledges there's only so much she can do. Sometimes, the app's navigation falters, she said, which can delay some rides and result in lower tips.

"There are some days when I don't see any tips at all," Cassady said.

Some drivers like Jillian, 67, who drives in Santa Clarita, California, have a simple solution for getting more tips — asking riders directly. Before riders get out, she asks them nicely if they could leave a tip.

However, it's not a perfect strategy. She's recently gotten a lot of $1 tips and, despite keeping her car in mint condition, she can work for six to eight hours without a tip.

The inconsistency is working against some drivers

Alex Santiago, a 48-year-old Uber driver in northern Virginia, used to dress business casual and catered music to passengers. But after years of inconsistent tips, he stopped trying so hard.

Some days, he drives with slippers on. Other days, he listens to podcasts he wants to hear. He displays signs stating what passengers can't do, such as eating or talking on speaker. After making these changes, he said he hasn't seen tips decline.

"I'm not providing amenities such as water and games — I don't run a day care, I drive a car," Santiago said.

He's realized tipping patterns are often inconsistent, even though he still aims to provide good service — he keeps his car clean with a $35 monthly subscription to a carwash, and he always helps riders with luggage.

"There are days where I'll get zero tips on 20 rides, then there are days I get tipped eight out of 20 rides," Santiago said.

Jason S., 50, said the frequency and quantity of tips he's received fell during the pandemic. He estimates between a third to half of riders tipped pre-pandemic, but now he's lucky if it's one in six. He suspects increasing rates for riders has reduced tips, as he hasn't changed his driving habits. Those who tip likely always tip regardless of service, he said.

"I used to look at tips as extra, now I desperately need those tips to keep my hourly up," Jason said. "I used to be able to earn anywhere from $32 an hour up to as much as $55 an hour with good bonuses. Now if I hit $25 an hour, it's a miracle."

He thinks there's nothing he can do differently to maximize tips. People rarely request music and he said most riders will turn down candy or drinks.

"One extra good-quality ride with me is probably not going to make the difference to a person who doesn't want to tip anyway to all of a sudden deciding, 'I better tip this guy,'" Jason said.

For some drivers, trying to get tips can backfire.

Andre Kingston, 50, said passengers sometimes reprimand her for trying too hard to get tips. The Detroit-based driver said she'd gotten one-star reviews for "talking too much" or not being polite, even though she says she always greets people and asks them for their music selection.

"It is the talking accusations that hurt the worst," Kingston said. "They make me not want to talk to others. They make me afraid to open my mouth."

Low tipping levels have led Jason, a 49-year-old ride-hailing driver in Phoenix, to no longer provide the same level of service.

"I used to open doors for everyone and adjust the seats for everyone and offer whatever music request any passenger wanted and engaged in whatever conversation the passengers wanted to engage in," he told BI. "But I don't get tipped for it anymore, and I'm over it."

He said his new strategy is to not accept rides that pay him below $20, even though this has lowered his acceptance rate and made him ineligible for Uber's driver rewards program.

"I can no longer accept cheaper rides and hope for a tip to get me there," he said.

Are you a gig driver who is struggling to make ends meet? Are you driving into your retirement years? Reach out to these reporters at nsheidlower@businessinsider.com or jzinkula@businessinsider.com.

I will never play quarterback in the National Football League. I can't plant my feet in the pocket and throw into a tight window. I'm too short and flat-footed, and my asthmatic lungs give up after mere minutes of physical exertion. In high school, the only varsity letters I received were for marching band.

But when I recently took the NFL's preeminent player evaluation, it revealed that I have several skills that pro teams are looking for. In fact, I outperformed nearly all draft prospects in certain categories of this test, floundering on only one. The best part? I didn't even break a sweat.

I took the exam while sitting in an office chair within the suburban Tennessee corporate headquarters of a testing startup called S2 Cognition. Purporting to be the "only sports evaluation that scientifically measures an athlete's game-speed cognitive abilities down to a millisecond level," these tests — which feel like a cross between playing Pong and taking an eye exam — have fast become part and parcel of how many scouts find the next billion-dollar athlete. More than 52 colleges and universities and 16 of the NFL's 32 teams pay S2 to administer tests to prospective signees and to keep the results confidential.

Jack Marucci, the longtime athletic-training director at the SEC powerhouse Louisiana State University, told me the tests helped him identify his athletes' natural strengths and weaknesses and adjust their training to get the most out of them. "We get a lot of Maseratis here," Marucci said, "but we've got to fine-tune the engine a little bit and find out what's going to make them stay at that high gear."

While others have questioned S2's professed efficacy, the company is quickly expanding beyond sports and into law enforcement, the military, and even the boardroom. In the not-distant future, as the corporate hiring process grows ever more layered and as the compulsion to measure every conceivable facet of ourselves grows ever more feverish, you might be taking a version of this high-speed, highly stressful test to land your next job.

This is what brought me to Nashville. I may be genetically damned to never be a Tennessee Titan, but perhaps my test results can help propel me to become a titan of industry. Somehow, I have a slightly easier time believing that.

When I arrived at S2's brand-new, still undecorated offices this spring, I was greeted by its founders, Brandon Ally and Scott Wylie, two college athletes turned neuroscientists. After spending their early careers researching individual differences in cognitive deterioration — Ally studied Alzheimer's disease and Wylie studied Parkinson's disease — they founded S2 in 2015, deciding they could apply their work to studying individual differences in cognitive function in world-class athletes. "We are essentially working at both ends of the spectrum, from breakdown to elite expression of cognitive systems," Ally says.

They drew interest for their work with quarterbacks, who often need to be the quickest thinkers on the football field. The difference between throwing a touchdown and taking a brutal sack could be that extra tenth of a second the QB takes to see patterns developing downfield. To gauge whether a QB has the brainpower to handle the pressure and noise, S2 has designed a sequence of tests to measure their reaction time, impulse control, and processing speed, among other traits.

By 2016, S2 had found a hungry market in the NFL. For general managers, drafting and trading players are high-stakes decisions, with up to hundreds of millions of dollars — and the managers' own jobs — on the line. Selecting the wrong quarterback can set a franchise back years, while nabbing the next Patrick Mahomes or Lamar Jackson (neither of whom was the first quarterback drafted in his class) can catapult a team to year-after-year Super Bowl contention. Small wonder teams would pay a king's ransom for a test that promises to give them an edge in knowing which quarterback to draft out of college or sign in free agency.

For many years, the standard-bearer for evaluating the brains of NFL athletes was the Wonderlic, a short IQ test with a series of increasingly difficult questions. While the test is still used in the corporate world, often as part of the interview process, it has largely fallen out of favor in pro sports as research has indicated its scores are not statistically correlated with athletic performance. The Wonderlic has also been criticized as perpetuating racial and socioeconomic biases.

"We are always living under the ghost of the Wonderlic," Ally says. "People think whatever's between the ears is all sort of the same thing — that it's all IQ." For S2, he says, it's a marketing challenge as much as anything to convince prospective clients that "there are things in the brain, and that the brain does, that can correlate to performance in sports." John Michel, an associate professor of management and organizations at Loyola University Maryland who has extensively studied the efficacy of testing in workplaces, agrees there's a distinction. While the Wonderlic, he says, assesses only crystallized intelligence ("How well can you remember something you've learned?"), the S2 gauges fluid intelligence ("How well can you observe multiple objects moving at once in space? How well can you keep track of things?").

Can a test designed for pass rushers and designated hitters really help companies evaluate candidates and fast-track potential executives?

But not everyone is convinced that S2 is a magic bullet. In April 2023, an independent reporter published leaked test results from the Ohio State quarterback C.J. Stroud, then favored to be the first player selected in the NFL draft, over the Alabama quarterback Bryce Young. The report indicated that Stroud had bombed the S2, scoring in the 18th percentile, while Young scored in the 98th. One week later, Young was drafted first overall, and Stroud fell to second. But then Stroud, the alleged dolt, went on to have one of the best rookie campaigns of any NFL quarterback, while Young struggled all year. Headlines flooded in calling the S2 the second coming of the Wonderlic, or an outright sham.

While S2 won't publicly talk about the details of Stroud's results, Ally said Stroud's reported score was "not legit." Stroud himself seemed to admit he didn't give the test his full effort: "Some things I apply myself to, some things I don't," he told The Athletic.

Still, the backlash has continued into this year. In February, the prominent sports agency Athletes First, which represents Stroud, the Jets quarterback Aaron Rodgers, and many other top players, instructed its clients to skip cognitive evaluations including the S2 and Athletic Intelligence Quotient, a rival test.

At the S2 office, it was time for me to take the test. Unlike the Wonderlic, the S2 isn't anything like a standardized exam: It's a rapid-fire battery of pressure-filled visual simulations that require split-second decision-making, conducted on a gaming laptop or Xbox console connected to a hypersensitive keypad. "I don't care if you have Einsteinian-level IQ or you barely pulled a D-minus average," Wylie told me just before I began. "That's not going to help you."

We agreed I wouldn't divulge the specifics of the test, but I'll say that there are eight five-minute modules: One evaluates your perception speed, another your tracking ability, and another your abilities to intuit a pattern on the fly. Many of them involve dots flying around a screen or flashing before your eyes, and demand an instant reactions by clicking a button or pressing an arrow.

It was grueling, requiring intense concentration and locked-in vision. I wasn't on a football field with 300-pound linemen protecting me from shifty edge rushers, but I felt the pressure. There were moments when I felt completely in the zone, and others when some subconscious impulse led my button-mashing prowess astray. By the end I felt exhausted, and I was certain I'd failed.

Unfazed by the controversy over Stroud, S2 has begun selling its tests to other sectors. The several law-enforcement agencies and special operations military groups it has partnered with so far feel like a natural extension: People in both fields often require the same high-pressure, split-second decision-making skills as athletes.

But the company's expansion into corporate settings is a more significant departure. Can a test originally designed for pass rushers and designated hitters really help companies, as S2 claims it can, evaluate outside talent, invest in worker training, and fast-track potential executives?

For many metrics-intensive corporations, S2's testing isn't all that different from what they've been using to assess candidates for decades. IQ tests and personality tests like the Myers-Briggs or the Enneagram have long been deployed to evaluate candidates' aptitude, intelligence, and cultural fit. Many of the world's top companies, such as Goldman Sachs, Boeing, Meta, and Alphabet, already do many of the things S2 is offering, albeit by compiling teams of psychometricians or human-resources experts in bespoke assessment centers. It's no surprise, then, that Fortune 500 companies have been reaching out to S2. (The company won't disclose its nonathletic clients.)

A few years ago, S2 ran a pilot program at three companies in different industries. Wylie says it focused on evaluating employees and discussing with them, rather than their managers, how their results could help them "understand themselves a little bit better beyond just personality and group dynamics" and find ways to adjust their workflows or different roles they could move to. "If we can help every individual maximize their performance and efficiency," Wylie added, "gosh, that's just going to elevate departments, elevate teams." The S2 team learned that some workers were more sensitive than others about what they wanted their employers to know about them.

When Ally and Wylie evaluate so-called corporate athletes — a term that makes even them cringe a bit, though they nevertheless use — they look at dynamic memory systems, including explicit and implicit memory (think recall versus intuition), and executive cognitive systems (such as impulse control and risk-taking). Some of these have crossover with a pro athlete's skill set, while others fall outside.

Michel says a fluid-intelligence test like the S2 could be helpful in deciding whether a candidate would make the right hire or whether an employee is right for a managerial role, but only as part of a suite of tests and reviews of their work product, or as a way to narrow down a large pool of interview candidates.

Wylie and Ally also say their tests should work in tandem with other evaluations. After all, perhaps there's no bigger red flag for a prospective employee than when your future employer relies on one metric to say whether you're a fit or not, whether you can handle the work and live up to expectations. I know I'd be turned off.

After finishing my test, I nervously trudged down the hall to a conference room, where Wylie had my results displayed on a laptop screen. To my surprise, he was smiling.

It turned out that my tracking capacity — my ability to follow movements around a screen — was less than stellar. Among NFL prospects, I would have scored in the 6th percentile. My perception speed was fairly average (48th) and my impulse control above average (84th).

But in instinctive learning — in which I had to trust my gut, figure out a pattern, and stick with it despite distractions being thrown my way — I somehow scored in the 97th percentile. "Most people get up and say, oh man, that was tough," Wylie said. "You actually deduced the optimal responses very quickly, very efficiently. A lot of our general managers crush that."

Earlier I had told Wylie that I was easily distractible and often struggled to focus. But then I scored in the 98th percentile on the distraction-control test. "I don't care what you say: When you want to lock in and block out distractions, you can," Wylie said

Perhaps, it's time for me, as a worker, to amend my environment so I can find better ways to remove distractions and lock in. When I finally do that, NFL front offices should give me a call. I won't need the tracking ability of an NFL safety watching a play unfold in front of him, but maybe I can run a franchise.

Scott Nover is a freelance writer based in Columbus, Ohio. He is a contributing writer at Slate and was previously a staff writer at Quartz and Adweek covering media and technology.

• Tech industry layoffs are ongoing and widespread, impacting companies like Google, Tesla, and Apple.
• CEOs at big tech companies blame the cuts on overhiring and a shift towards a smaller workforce.
• Companies are also restructuring workforces to prioritize AI development.

Layoffs have been plaguing the tech industry since the start of 2023 — and for many companies, the cuts have continued into 2024 and aren't over.

A number of Big Tech companies have laid off staff this year, including Google, Tesla, Apple, and dozens more. Ironically, companies haven't been slowing down on innovation, with many releasing a constant stream of AI updates and product launches.

Mark Zuckerberg shared his theory on the first round of industry-wide layoffs in an interview with "Morning Brew Daily" in February. He said companies overhired during the pandemic due to e-commerce sales skyrocketing and had to cut back once sales returned to normal.

That seems to ring true for a lot of CEOs. Discord CEO Jason Citron also said in an employee memo in January that the company had increased its workforce by fivefold since 2020. Google CEO Sundar Pichai said in 2023 that the company experienced "dramatic growth" over the past two years, which led to hiring "for a different economic reality" than the present.

Salesforce CEO and cofounder Mark Benioff also relayed the same sentiment in a letter to employees announcing layoffs in 2023. He said as revenue increased during the pandemic, the company hired "too many people leading into this economic downturn."

But why are industry-wide layoffs still so widespread and ongoing?

We took a look at what CEOs have said about staff cuts to help us understand why it's still going on.

The less, the better

Zuckerberg said in the "Morning Brew Daily" interview that companies realized the benefits of being leaner, which led to more layoffs. Meta's an example of that — after thousands were cut in Zuckerberg's "year of efficiency," in 2023, the company appeared to make a comeback.

"It was obviously really tough. We parted with a lot of talented people we cared about," Zuckerberg said in the interview. "But in some ways, actually becoming leaner kind of makes the company more effective."

Google seems to be enacting a similar strategy this year. CEO Sundar Pichai told Bloomberg reporter Emily Chang in May that the company is removing some teams completely to "improve velocity."

The tech giant conducted multiple rounds of layoffs this year, with the most recent being in its Cloud unit at the end of May.

Wayfair's cofounders also seem to think the company operates better with fewer people. The company has conducted multiple rounds off layoffs since 2022 and most recently laid off 13% of its workforce in January.

CEO Niraj Shah and cofounder Steve Conine wrote in a letter to shareholders in February that several rounds of layoffs helped the company get more done at a faster rate and lower cost.

Jobs are being restructured for AI

Google's CEO also said in the Bloomberg interview in May that the company is "reallocating people" to its "highest priorities."

Some of those priorities include AI projects, like the creation of an ARM-based central processing unit, the advancement of Gemini, an AI-powered Search, and various updates to Google Workspace.

Google isn't the only one to restructure its workforce to make room for AI.

Microsoft CEO Satya Nadella explained similar reasoning in a memo last year and said the company would continue to hire in "key strategic areas."

Last May, IBM CEO Arvind Krishna said he could easily see 30% of HR and non-consumer-facing roles "replaced by AI and automation" in the next five years. The company conducted its latest round of cuts in March.

Dropbox CEO Drew Houston similarly said in a 2023 layoff announcement that its next stage of growth required a different set of skills, "particularly in AI and early-stage product development."

It's unclear how long the restructuring will last. But for the moment, tech companies don't seem to be slowing down on AI advancement.

• Patagonia has told 90 customer service staff to relocate to one of seven locations or leave. 
• The affected staff have three days to inform the company of their decision. 
• The company is trying to improve team culture and support business needs, a spokesperson told Business Insider. 

Sustainable outdoors brand Patagonia has given 90 US employees a choice — tell the company you are willing to relocate by Friday or leave your job.

The employees all work in customer services, known at Patagonia as the customer experience (CX) team, and are able to work remotely to field calls and inquiries.

They were first alerted on Tuesday morning when they received a text and email.

"At 10 a.m. PST we will be hosting an important Town Hall Meeting," read the internal email, which was seen by Business Insider.

"We understand that some are scheduled to be off today, but please know that we will pay you for the day [8 hours] if you can make the time to attend."

Half an hour later, in a 15-minute town hall hosted by executives Amy Velligan and Bruce Old, staff were informed that the team would be moving to a new "hub" model.

CX employees must now live within 60 miles of one of seven "hubs" — Atlanta, Salt Lake City, Reno, Dallas, Austin, Chicago, or Pittsburgh.

Workers have been offered $4,000 toward relocation costs, and extra PTO. Those who choose to relocate must do so by September 30.

If not willing to move state, staff must leave the company. They have been given 72 hours, until Friday, to confirm their decision.

"It was very factual. If you don't live in these seven metro areas, you either need to move there or give us your stuff and hit the brick," one affected CX worker told BI.

"If we don't respond by Friday, they will assume that we have chosen the severance package and we'll start that process."

The town hall was followed by a one-on-one meeting with HR, before access to company laptops and phones was shut off later that day.

Patagonia verified the details of the announcement to BI, confirming that 90 of 255 CX staff in the US were affected.

"I definitely feel like I've been laid off," one CX worker told BI, asking to remain anonymous as they had yet to finalize their severance package. "I've never been late for work; I have gotten nothing but outstanding performance reviews."

The severance package was generous, the worker said, but added it was sad to see a company they had believed in "fall to the Walmart level."

Both employees BI spoke to said they were accepting the severance and did not know anyone who was considering relocation.

Patagonia spokesperson Corley Kenna told BI several employees had already indicated they would relocate.

"These changes are crucial for us to build a vibrant team culture," Kenna explained, adding that feeling disconnected had been a common complaint amongst CX workers.

The company hopes to bring staff together at the hubs at least once every six weeks for in-person trainings, company gatherings, or Activism Hours.

Hub locations

Patagonia chose the hubs on the basis of "where we have existing community and retail locations," Kenna said.

California, a state that is core to the brand's identity and plays home to its corporate HQ in Ventura, as well as seven stores and outlets, was not chosen.

Both employees who spoke to BI believed this was because Patagonia doesn't want to handle the increased demands of employees in states with higher costs of living.

"We've been asking for raises for a long time, and they keep telling us that your wage is based on a Reno [a city in Nevada] cost of living and where you choose to live is on you."

"Unfortunately, a California-based hub would not meet the criteria we set for a sustainable CX model," Kenna told BI, confirming that the cost of living and other business needs contributed to the decision.

"The reality is that our CX team has been running at 200% to 300% overstaffed for much of this year," Kenna told BI.

"While we hoped to reach the needed staffing levels through attrition, those numbers were very low, and retention remained high."

'Big corp in sheep's clothing'

The company, founded by rock climber Yvon Chouinard in 1973, was ranked the most reputable brand in the US in 2023, according to an Axios-Harris poll.

Jokingly referred to as Patagucci, it has become the go-to uniform for style-conscious tech developers and mountaineers alike.

Now a multibillion-dollar company, it is beloved for its focus on sustainability and efforts to develop a more ethical form of capitalism.

"Let my people go surfing" was Chouinard's relaxed mindset toward working culture.

In 2022, the founder took the unprecedented step of transferring Patagonia to a trust and nonprofit, directing the profits toward combatting the climate crisis.

"Instead of 'going public,' you could say we're 'going purpose," Chouinard wrote at the time.

Since September 2022, Patagonia has donated more than $71 million in earnings to charitable causes, the New York Times reported earlier this year.

"It feels like they're full of shit, that they would rather spend their money on the world instead of their people," one worker said in response to the restructuring.

"I think that the company has changed a lot since it sold to Mother Earth," agreed the second CX employee. "Since Yvon stepped away, it's been a slow burn of shifting away from caring about employees."

The rhetoric around attendance is tougher, and for the last year, employees were told the company was over budget, the employee added.

"Patagonia is not this small niche outdoor company anymore, it's a big corp in sheep's clothing. I still think they made good products, but I think they don't treat their people as well as they claim to."

Are you a worker at Patagonia? Contact this reporter at pthompson@businessinsider.com

• Daily essentials are inflating faster than broad inflation indexes, making life harder for many Americans.
• The ALICE Essentials Index shows a 7.3% annual increase in basic costs from 2021 to 2023.
• Rising costs are outpacing wage growth, affecting the West and Southeast the most.

It's no secret that Americans have been feeling the pinch of inflation everywhere they go — but daily essentials are only getting pricier. It could be making workers feel even worse.

The latest report from research organization United For ALICE — which tracks asset-limited, income-constrained, but employed Americans — looks at how the costs of basic essentials are rising. ALICE Americans make above the federal poverty level but not enough to comfortably afford all their daily expenses, often making too much to qualify for government assistance.

The ALICE Essentials Index, which includes housing, childcare, food, transportation, healthcare, and technology costs, has risen by a projected 7.3% annually from 2021 to 2023; comparatively, CPI has risen by 6.1%.

"CPI measures our whole economy and the goods and services that people of all income levels purchase, whereas ALICE Essentials is only the basics," Stephanie Hoopes, national director at United For ALICE, told Business Insider. "Those basics have been increasing even more" than broader prices, she said.

And those costs are even outpacing the rapid wage growth that lower-earning Americans have seen.

Data on the annual rate of change between 2021 and projected 2023 values for the ALICE Essentials Index suggests that prices have increased most in the West and Southeast. Arizona's annual rate of change for prices of the basic goods and services tracked by the essentials index during this time period was 10.4%, while Georgia, Florida, and South Carolina were all above 9%.

The Midwest and Northeast were less impacted by rising prices for essentials, though many of these states were still in the 6% to 7% range.

Even so, prices are still rising everywhere, as the index jumped in each region since 2021 — rising faster than most years prior. While United For ALICE anticipates the index plateauing in the South, the Midwest, West, and Northeast are expected to continue increasing through 2024.

Since most inflation indexes focus on urban areas, rural areas are often omitted from many inflation numbers. The ALICE Essentials Index for rural areas was slightly higher than that for urban areas, at 7.5% and 7.2%, respectively.

Americans who are ALICE were already struggling to get by: Business Insider has spoken to many employed Americans — including a couple who bring home over six figures — who still can't make ends meet.

Many are excluded from federal assistance, frequently tied to an outdated federal poverty line. The poverty line is based on a formula from the 1960s that estimated people spent about a third of their income on food, which is now only 13%.

"Long before everybody else was upset about inflation, ALICE was dealing with inflation," Hoopes said.

There's also good news in the economy, especially for those with lower wages: Jobs numbers have been encouraging, as the economy added 272,000 jobs last month — almost 100,000 more than expectations. Healthcare and leisure and hospitality were two sectors seeing the largest job increases. Still, ALICE Americans tend to be overrepresented in these roles, as many pay below the ALICE threshold of about $55,000 a year.

Rising prices for essentials might be a factor in many Americans' economic gloom.

"I think this really helps explain the disconnect between the broad macroeconomic indicators that are showing a strong economy and that personal disconnect that we see on the ground," Hoopes said, adding: "Just the mere fact that working full time in some of these jobs that are hard jobs, you're not able to support a basic family budget — I think that explains a lot of dissatisfaction and the disconnect."

Are you struggling to keep up with the cost of daily essentials? Contact these reporters at nsheidlower@businessinsider.com and jkaplan@businessinsider.com.

• A steep shortage of homes has created a serious housing crisis across the country.
• Record numbers of Americans are spending more than they can afford on their mortgage or rent.
• Biden and Trump offer divergent approaches to federal housing policy.

The US is facing a housing crisis. A severe shortage of homes, high interest rates, and elevated building costs mean record numbers of Americans are spending more than they can afford on housing and are homeless.

The economy will likely be a central focus of this week's first presidential debate. Former President Donald Trump has promised to attack President Joe Biden specifically on inflation. And Trump has repeatedly accused his successor of not doing enough to keep housing costs in check.

Since taking office, Biden has pursued a grab bag of policies to incentivize affordable home construction and preservation, loosen regulations that restrict home construction, and subsidize homeownership and the cost of renting. As president, Trump proposed massive cuts to federal housing assistance for the neediest households and rolled back some fair housing policies, while urging states and cities to pursue some zoning reform — a goal that progressives also tend to support.

There have been some bipartisan efforts at the federal level to address the housing crisis. Generally, Republicans tend to be content with states and local governments controlling housing policy, while Democrats are traditionally more supportive of federal subsidies and intervention.

But lawmakers across the ideological spectrum are quick to concede the country is facing a crisis. Home prices have risen 47% since the pandemic, mortgage interest rates are hovering around 7%, and over half of renters spend more than 30% of their income on housing, making them cost-burdened, according to a new Harvard report on the state of US housing. Even as the Federal Reserve has raised interest rates, demand and prices have stayed high, keeping housing inflation stubbornly elevated.

Americans are increasingly concerned about it. US adults listed housing costs as their second-most pressing financial issue in a recent Gallup poll. The concern is bipartisan, although more pronounced among Democrats. Three in four US adults — 83% of Democrats and 68% of Republicans — say the lack of affordable homes is a "significant" problem.

Where Biden stands

As president, Biden has pushed a series of pro-housing policies and generally come out in favor of more federal participation in housing policy.

Among those policy pushes was the "Housing Supply Action" plan, which leverages federal grants and loans to incentivize states and cities to loosen land use regulations and facilitate new construction. The administration has also pushed a slew of initiatives to boost the supply of affordable housing, including encouraging the conversion of office buildings into homes with billions of dollars in federal grants and loans and boosting support for manufactured housing.

Biden's fiscal year 2025 budget proposal, which represents a sort of wish list of the administration's priorities but would require action from an often-gridlocked Congress to become law, includes $258 billion for housing initiatives, including tax credits for first-time homebuyers, homeowners who sell their starter homes, and those who build or renovate starter homes, and an expansion of the Low Income Housing Tax Credit and housing choice vouchers for renters.

Biden has discussed housing in the State of the Union and on the campaign trail, including in Nevada, which is facing a particularly severe affordability crisis. "If inflation keeps coming down — and it's predicted to do that — mortgage rates are going to come down as well, but I'm not going to wait," he said during a speech in Las Vegas in March.

In another indication that the White House is centering housing policy as the election nears, Vice President Kamala Harris and Treasury Secretary Janet Yellen this week announced $85 million in funding for 21 cities to subsidize affordable housing development and the construction of supportive infrastructure, including power lines and water mains.

Some of Biden's farthest-reaching policies were cut from the Inflation Reduction Act, and still others are unlikely to make it through Congress, where Republicans have opposed the vast majority of Democrats' housing proposals.

While some housing policy experts have praised the Biden administration's policies, many of the same experts say its actions haven't gone far enough to address the crisis.

Where Trump stands

As president, Trump didn't pursue as many policies directly intended to make housing more affordable. While in office, Trump's proposed budgets included significant cuts to agencies that provide federal housing subsidies, including the Department of Housing and Urban Development. His proposed 2021 budget would have cut housing assistance and community development aid — including shrinking the housing voucher program and slashing funds for public housing — by about 15%, not factoring in inflation, according to the Center on Budget and Policy Priorities.

Trump rolled back certain fair housing protections, including imposing a higher bar for proving housing discrimination and eliminating an Obama-era rule designed to reduce racial segregation. Trump claimed Biden wanted to "abolish" the suburbs and assured suburbanites they would "no longer be bothered or financially hurt by having low income housing built in your neighborhood" after he dismantled the Obama rule, which Biden later restored. The Trump administration also created "Opportunity Zones," designed to incentivize businesses to invest in low-income neighborhoods. But the program has done little to boost affordable housing.

Trump hasn't talked much about housing policy on the campaign trail, despite arguing that Biden hasn't done enough to control housing costs. Last year, he unveiled a vague proposal in a video posted to Truth Social to build up to 10 new American cities on federal land as a way to give American families "a new shot at homeownership."

In another video titled "Ending the Nightmare of the Homeless, Drug Addicts, and Dangerously Deranged," Trump said he would "ban urban camping" in an effort to criminalize unsheltered homelessness. Trump has also promised to crack down on immigration, which his campaign argues would relieve pressure on the housing market. Campaign press secretary Karoline Leavitt said in a statement to NPR that Trump would "stop the unstainable invasion of illegal aliens which is driving up housing costs, cut taxes for American families, [and] eliminate costly regulations."

The best stretch of my working life is a period I remember fondly as "Sundays with Jennifer," six months or so in college when I was waiting tables alongside my favorite coworker, named — you guessed it — Jennifer. We spent our shifts chatting and screwing around, treating patrons as little more than an interruption in our weekly hang. We spent weeks planning a "cake party" for our other work friends. One day she brought in weed cookies and one of our coworkers got so high they couldn't figure out how to get out of the bathroom. I do not know if our customers enjoyed the Em-Jen experience, let alone our employer, but we did.

Would I do that today? Ehhh, almost definitely not. For one thing, I take work more seriously now. I'm also more ambivalent about the idea of making close friends at work. I've been at Business Insider for only a few months, and I work in a hybrid situation, so it's trickier to befriend colleagues. It's not that I don't want to get to know anyone, but as someone who's been guilty of blurring the line between professional and personal too much in the past, I've found it refreshing to have some distance. This realization is coming at a time when work friendships are dying out, and the more I think about it, the more I think it may be for the best.

The most obvious reason for the demise of the work friend is the rise of remote work. It's hard to make a new work bestie via Slack and Zoom. While most white-collar workers aren't fully remote anymore, many are still in hybrid situations. The pandemic changed the way people interact and socialize with their colleagues, even in person. We're no longer in the trenches together day after day. This shifting context has led to some changes in the way we develop relationships at work.

There's been a lot of alarmist rhetoric around friendless work. The general line is that work friendships are good because social connections at work keep people productive and engaged and help them manage stress. These friendships improve their job satisfaction and make them less likely to quit. Even if someone is sure they don't care about making nice with their colleagues, networking is still a thing, and refusing to play ball may very well hurt their career in the long run. The lonest of the lone wolves needs some sort of connection.

"I really don't think human beings can toil at their jobs for 40, 50, 60 hours a week without social support in a healthy manner for a sustained amount of time," said Constance Noonan Hadley, an organizational psychologist who founded the Institute for Life at Work.

I'm not disputing that personal bonds are important in the working world. Developing a rapport with colleagues is a good idea, but that doesn't mean everyone needs to scramble to find an office BFF. Even before the pandemic, workplaces moved out of the center of people's lives as they aged. You get older and have kids, and you're not so interested in chatting with your 20-something colleagues about their wild weekends. Or you become a manager, and the happy-hour invites slow to a trickle because people don't want to knock back a bunch of beers in front of the boss.

More working from home and a detachment from the physical office sped up this transition for many people. Worse things could happen. After years of being told to bring our whole selves to work, many of us could stand to leave a little more at home.

The reason people work from home is because it's good for their personal life.

Much of the research on friendships at work focuses on how it's a good deal for employers. Employees' feeling a sense of kumbaya helps them get more done and improves bottom-line results. In some cases, this can come at the expense of employees' best interests. Deeper emotional ties can make them more hesitant to leave their jobs — they're comfortable, and they don't want to leave their friends behind. That's great for bosses, but for workers, I mean, who cares? I've loved gossiping with coworkers, but I hope that never caused any of them to doubt whether they should leave for a better opportunity.

"If you feel disconnected from your coworkers, you're less of a team player. But those are all work-related outcomes," said William Chopik, a social-personality psychologist at Michigan State University who studies relationships. "The reason people work from home is because it's good for their personal life." Chopik added that usually research on working from home focuses on whether it makes people worse at their jobs and not on whether, for example, the lack of a commute benefits them.

There are plenty of non-career-related downsides, too. Work friendships can lead to cliquishness and exclusion or even just endless whining sessions among colleagues. Workplaces are often competitive, and if one friend gets ahead, tensions can arise. We are sometimes suspicious of our coworkers, wondering if they're interacting with us only because they want something, and we doubt we can trust them at all.

On a fundamental level, work friendships aren't the same as friendship friendships. Confusing the two can lead to tension or hurt feelings. A 2018 paper argues that the "four defining features of friendship (informality, voluntariness, communal norms, and socioemotional goals) are in tension with four fundamental elements of organizational life (formal roles, involuntary constraints, exchange norms, and instrumental goals). We hopefully aren't friends with others because we're getting something proportionate and specific out of the relationship in the way we are with work. Saying something embarrassingly stupid in front of a friend is much more acceptable than saying it in front of a coworker, where a certain level of formality is usually part of the deal.

"I think we should try to bring our best professional selves to work, but why should we bring our intimate selves to work?" said Hakan Ozcelik, a professor of management at the College of Business Administration at Sacramento State University. "Our intimate selves and our needs and our desires and our purposes in our intimate roles as human beings should be fulfilled in other domains in our lives rather than at work."

He recently presented research that looked at employees' emotions at work, eliciting stories of when people felt happy, sad, angry, etc. What he and his coauthors found was that task-related events, such as finishing a project, were likelier to result in positive emotions than relationship-related events, such as getting appreciation from a colleague. Employees were likelier to report negative emotions in response to relationship-related events than task-related events.

Ozcelik argued that Perhaps this means the task-related events, rather than the relationship-related events, are where "the happiness, the real joy, comes from," Ozcelik said.

There's no one-size-fits-all formula for friendships at work. It depends on the workplace, your colleagues, and your own personality. Some people need to feel like they belong at work, while others derive most of their satisfaction from the job itself. Hadley, the organizational psychologist, was adamant that no one should try to go it alone forever, professionally, though she acknowledged some workarounds. Perhaps you don't have a lot of friends in your office but you start going to a coworking space or an industry networking event and meeting people there.

It's fine to shut your laptop at 5, tell Jane or Joe or whoever to have a good night, and not know what that night entails.

"You need professional colleagues in some kind of relationship way," she said.

There's space for moderation, though, or even the chance to shed some work friendships for good. Given that we spent the past few decades being told to bring our whole selves to work or hearing from employers about how we're all family, it seems like a positive development that some workers are implementing more boundaries, to use some therapyspeak. You don't have to be a jerk to your colleagues, but you also don't have to invite them to your wedding or say yes to happy hour or know all the ins and outs of their personal lives. It's fine to shut your laptop at 5, tell Jane or Joe or whoever to have a good night, and not know what that night entails. In a culture as work-obsessed as ours, it's OK to lean out some and still stay connected.

"Work is about getting certain things done by using your skills and your intelligence and your network, and so whatever you do there creates an aura," Ozcelik said. "And then if you are connected to that environment, that's great. You are not a lonely employee. But that doesn't mean that there are people there who love you."

Emily Stewart is a senior correspondent at Business Insider, writing about business and the economy.

• Two NASA astronauts are still in space after Boeing's Starliner spacecraft faced delays.
• The spacecraft's plight adds to the pressure on Boeing.
• The company faces questions over safety after a door plug on one of its planes blew out in midair.

When Boeing announced in 2015 that its $4.2 billion spacecraft would be named Starliner, NASA officials hailed the manufacturer's innovation as a "great victory" that heralded the start of a new age of space exploration.

Nearly a decade later, that new era is off to a rocky start.

NASA astronauts Butch Wilmore and Suni William are still in space after the Starliner spacecraft, which was designed to ferry NASA personnel to and from the International Space Station, was hit by a series of issues on its maiden crewed voyage.

The aviation giant's first commercial spaceship experienced malfunctioning thrusters and several helium leaks as it docked with the ISS.

The two astronauts aboard Starliner were planned to be at the space station for a little over a week, but Boeing and NASA have delayed their return to Earth to sometime in July.

The FT reported on Wednesday that Boeing said Starliner was performing well and the astronauts were not stranded. "It is a test flight," the company said. "The mission is still going and it is going well."

It echoes similar previous comments by both Boeing and NASA that the Starliner is safe and operating effectively.

Officials have stressed that the latest delay is simply to allow ground teams to assess the five helium leaks and thruster issues the craft has experienced.

Still, Starliner's teething issues add to the multitude of woes facing outgoing Boeing CEO David Calhoun.

The airplane maker has been in a state of crisis since the door plug on a Boeing 737 Max 9 plane flown by Alaska Airlines blew out in midair earlier this year.

Since then, a series of whistleblowers have come forward with allegations about Boeing's approach to safety, with one describing a "schedule over safety" culture in which employees were pressured to "overlook" concerns.

The company previously told BI that those allegations were not representative of the work it has done to "ensure the quality and long-term safety of the aircraft."

Boeing is facing federal investigations into the door blowout incident and a Southwest Airlines flight, which experienced a potentially dangerous "Dutch roll" movement while in the air.

The company could also soon be hit by criminal charges after the Department of Justice accused it of violating a settlement agreement over two 737 Max 8 crashes that killed 346 people in 2018 and 2019.

It's no wonder that Boeing is reportedly struggling to recruit Calhoun's successor.

The company has faced furious criticism from lawmakers and airlines, with the CEO of Boeing's biggest customer, United, describing the Alaska Airlines incident as "the straw that broke the camel's back."

At a Senate hearing last week, the company was accused of "cutting corners" on safety. Sen. Richard Blumenthal described it as a "moment of reckoning" for the company.

Understandably, repeated Starliner delays are a setback that Boeing does not need. The spacecraft was already years late and $1.5 billion over budget when it launched earlier this month, and Boeing is lagging behind rival SpaceX, which has been transporting astronauts to the ISS since 2020.

SpaceX founder Elon Musk is never one to miss the opportunity to trash talk a rival, and Boeing's plight is no exception.

The billionaire has frequently criticized Boeing on X, posting that the company had too many "non-technical managers" and calling out Calhoun's lack of an engineering background.

NASA and Boeing did not immediately respond to a request for comment made outside normal working hours.

• The median home price in May was $442,500, up from $441,000 in 2023, according to Realtor.com.
• Still, several big US cities saw home prices drop in May compared to the same time period in 2023.
• Miami saw the biggest decline — home prices fell by 11.2% year-over-year to $439,000.

The adage "what goes up must come down" is especially true in the real-estate market, where a slowdown in homebuying has led to price declines in cities across the country.

The median sales price for the entire US actually went up a bit — to $442,500 — in May from the previous May, which means buying a home hasn't become significantly more affordable for the typical American since last year.

However, with would-be buyers holding back, leading to less competition for homes, home prices in several major US metros have dropped by thousands of dollars, according to a new report from Realtor.com.

It comes down to consistently high mortgage rates and an overall increase in home financing costs, which have sidelined many prospective buyers.

"Higher mortgage rates compared with last May increased the monthly cost of financing 80% of the median home by roughly $158 compared with a year ago," said Danielle Hale, Redfin's chief economist. "This increased the required household income to purchase the median-priced home by $6,400, to $119,700, after also accounting for the cost of tax and insurance."

While this locks many Americans out of the market, it's good news for those who can still afford to buy a home in their area.

In pandemic boomtowns like Miami and Austin, which drew thousands of homebuyers looking for relatively affordable homes and more space, a pullback in demand has caused homes to stay on the market longer, prompting many sellers to reduce their prices.

In May, home prices in Miami and Austin dropped by 11.2% and 3.1%, respectively, compared to the same period in 2023, according to the report.

Realtor.com analyzed data from 50 of the largest US metros to calculate which ones saw the largest home-price declines in May.

Below are the 11 big cities with the largest price drops.

11. Raleigh, North Carolina

• Median home price: $462,000
• Percentage change year over year: -2.6%

10. San Antonio, Texas

• Median home price: $348,000
• Percentage change year over year: -2.6%

9. Detroit

• Median home price: $260,000
• Percentage change year over year: -3%

8. Austin

• Median home price: $565,000
• Percentage change year over year: -3.1%

7. Tampa, Florida

• Median home price: $425,000
• Percentage change year over year: -3.2%

6. San Jose, California

• Median home price: $1,469,000
• Percentage change year over year: -4.0%

5. Oklahoma City

• Median home price: $339,000
• Percentage change year over year: -4.3%

4. Kansas City, Missouri

• Median home price: $440,000
• Percentage change year over year: -4.9%

3. Seattle

• Median home price: $777,000
• Percentage change year over year: -5.5%

2. Denver

• Median home price: $639,000
• Percentage change year over year: -6.3%

1. Miami

• Median home price: $439,000
• Percentage change year over year: -11.2%

• Drone dogfights in Ukraine have drawn comparison to the aerial battles of WWI.
• In just two years, drone operators have become much more sophisticated.
• BI reviewed over 40 drone dogfights to see some of the main tactics that have emerged.

The sheer scale of drone use in Ukraine has given rise to an increasing battle for the skies, and the rise of drone-on-drone dogfights.

Thousands of uncrewed aerial vehicles take to the skies over Ukraine, serving a wide range of tasks such as directing artillery fire, surveillance, and acting as loitering munitions.

It's a set of tasks so integral to the fighting that earlier this month Ukraine's military launched the world's first stand-alone branch dedicated solely to drone warfare.

Before Russia's full-scale invasion of Ukraine, the world had only seen a handful of drone-on-drone incidents.

But now, Russia and Ukraine are "engaged in a 'drone arms race,' investing vast amounts of money, time, and expertise in developing and countering each other's systems," James Patton Rogers, a drone expert and director of the Cornell Brooks Tech Policy Institute, told BI.

Today, drones that once used their explosive payloads on multimillion-dollar armored vehicles are choosing to target other drones instead because of the threat they pose, Mike Monnik, CEO of drone intelligence platform DroneSec, told BI.

BI reviewed more than 40 videos of drone-on-drone skirmishes over Ukraine, collected and annotated by DroneSec, to identify some of the distinct — and often overlapping — tactics that have rapidly developed in this short period.

(BI was unable to independently verify some of the videos, which are often shared by partisan groups.)

Dropping down from above

The cheap and plentiful DJI Mavic drone has limited visibility directly overhead — meaning that a drone hovering above is a distinct threat.

The clip above, posted by a pro-Russian channel in early April, shows a Russian drone smashing directly down onto a Ukrainian DJI Mavic-3 drone, sending it tumbling out of the sky.

In early 2022, "much of this was by chance," Monnik said. He described how a small commercial drone out on reconnaissance might notice an enemy drone in the sky, fly above it, and drop down to clip its rotors.

"At this stage, in many occurrences, both drones would actually be disabled," Monnik said.

By 2024, DroneSec said it was seeing first-person view drones kitted out with proximity or remote detonation capabilities.

Crashing into an expensive drone with your cheap one

One of the simplest attacks is using an FPV drone to crash into an enemy drone, with or without an explosive attached.

Given that the attacking drone is often a write-off too, the biggest win is when a cheap device takes out something costly.

The above footage, shared on June 1, shows a Russian Orlan-10 drone being pursued by a Ukrainian FPV, with the video then cutting out.

The footage then shows an Orlan on the ground, seemingly destroyed by the encounter.

Orlan drones, which cost between $87,000-$120,000, have proved to be one of the "most critical systems contributing to the lethality" of Russian forces, according to the Royal United Services Institute.

Meanwhile, the most commonly used FPV drones cost just a few thousand dollars.

Dropping explosives on a drone in midair

Another type of attack from above, but this time by releasing an explosive directly onto the drone below, as in this footage of Ukrainian Mavic-3 drones being knocked out by Russian drones from above.

Ukrainian soldiers told BI last year how they began adapting COTS drones to carry munitions that could be dropped from above.

Flinging a net onto an enemy drone

In February 2023, Ukraine's Center for Strategic Communications and Information Security said it had received six US-made DroneHunter F700s, an AI-backed drone that can shoot a net over targets in midair.

Footage shared by the CSCIS shows the tech being used to take out Orlan drones and Shaheds, the large loitering munitions used by Russia to pummel Ukrainian infrastructure.

According to Scientific American, DroneHunter F700s have been in use in Ukraine since May 2022.

It appears Russia may have acquired similar tech. In the below video, posted in April by a pro-Russian account, a small drone — identified as Ukrainian — is ensnared in a net fired from above.

Hassling a drone before it can release its payload

In the footage below, shared in May, a Ukrainian drone strikes an explosive payload carried by a Russian DJI Mavic-3 drone before it can be released, according to DroneSec's analysis.

Skip the drone — take out the pilot

There are plenty of other ways of countering enemy drones, including hitting them at their source, Patton Rogers told BI.

Drones can be sent to look for antenna peeking out of windows — "a tell-tale sign of an enemy drone pilot covertly operating," he said.

"Once identified, single or multiple drones will be sent in to eliminate the human drone pilot," he added.

In the future, drones could take down helicopters

According to Scientific American, the market for counter-drone technology could be worth $12.6 billion by 2030, and given drone warfare developments, it might need to be.

Monnik said DroneSec has already seen multiple attempts to use small, weaponized drones to target helicopters and small aircraft.

Aircraft appear to be fighting back — in April, footage shared by multiple accounts showed what was described as a Ukrainian Yak-52 trainer plane taking on an Orlan. Further reporting from The War Zone suggests this is not a lone phenomenon.

Monnik also predicted that we'll soon see drones equipped with gun-like weapon platforms, and a greater prevalence of drones being deployed in swarm-like formations.

It's tempting to compare the phenomenon to the dogfights of World War I more than a century ago, when pilots targeted each other with front-mounted machine guns or even pistols while flying.

"There is still a visceral real-world connection between both warring parties — perhaps more so than WWI air personnel — as pilots attempt to outwit each other," Patton Rogers said.

The last thing many of the drone pilots will see through their doomed drone's viewfinders is the enemy drone — knowing that somewhere, at the other end, an enemy pilot is watching it all on their own headset, he said.

"Such is the morbid intimacy of modern war," he said.