Author: openjargon

• A slew of publishers are doing deals with OpenAI: They get cash, and the AI company gets their content.
• Those deals look bad to some critics — a replay of desperate deals publishers have done with Big Tech.
• But publishers say their eyes are wide open this time.

You've heard this one before: A big tech company is offering a lifeline to distressed media companies. It's not only writing checks, but promising to help those companies adapt to seismic change.

And because this is a story we've heard before, we know how it will end: The media companies will once again find they got a bad deal. And they will regret their pacts with a tech giant that doesn't care about their business — at all.

That's the argument against a slew of deals publishers have been making with Sam Altman's OpenAI over the past few months. Those publishers include Vox Media (my former employer), Axel Springer (the publisher that owns Business Insider, my current employer), Rupert Murdoch's News Corp., Barry Diller's Dotdash Meredith, and Laurene Powell Jobs' Atlantic Media.

The deal details haven't been released, but some of the publishers that made them tell me the deals have the same general shape: OpenAI offers them millions of dollars in cash over the course of the deal — typically three to five years — plus some credits to help them build and operate their own products using OpenAI's software. And the deals include promises to feature their content — along with links back to their sites — in OpenAI's products.

In exchange, OpenAI gets the rights to use essentially everything those companies have published. That's in part a settlement for OpenAI's previous use of the publishers' content, which it used to build the models that power the software company. And it's also a license to ingest new stuff the publishers make so that OpenAI software like ChatGPT can provide answers to questions about things that are happening now.

None of this impresses Jessica Lessin, the journalist who founded and runs the tech news site The Information. She made her case forcefully in The Atlantic last month:

"For as long as I have reported on internet companies, I have watched news leaders try to bend their businesses to the will of Apple, Google, Meta, and more. Chasing tech's distribution and cash, news firms strike deals to try to ride out the next digital wave. They make concessions to platforms that attempt to take all of the audience (and trust) that great journalism attracts, without ever having to do the complicated and expensive work of the journalism itself. And it never, ever works as planned."

I also worry that this is yet another Lucy-Charlie Brown-football moment. But I figured I'd ask the people making the deals — people who are well aware of the track record for these sorts of pacts — to tell me why they think this time is different. They were happy to do so, off the record.

Here's their argument in a nutshell:

Those other deals they did a long time ago? The ones with the likes of Google and Apple and, most particularly, Facebook? They actually have learned lessons from them.

Most crucially: Those deals required publishers to change their business — to create new formats, or make a particular kind of video or story they wouldn't normally make, or to make more of them than they'd normally make. (The one I remember most vividly was Facebook's live video push, which paid publishers like The New York Times to make boring videos.)

But the OpenAI deals, the publishers emphasize, are straightforward licensing deals for stuff they're already making. Nothing bespoke. "It doesn't change the way we operate," one of them tells me.

And that is by far the most common theme you hear when you talk to publishers about these deals. They're something close to free money — for work that was going to get made regardless.

Which means — they say — at the end of these deals, publishers won't have to regret investing in another defunct Big Tech project.

Another critique of these deals is that the publishers are selling their stuff too early, or for too little — and that they won't know what the real market is for this stuff for a long time. A variation on that: Why sell this stuff now, when fellow publishers — most notably The New York Times — are suing OpenAI (and its partner Microsoft) for using their data? Why not wait and see how that pans out?

The answers to that argument aren't quite as uniform. But if you boil them down, you can find a common theme: We don't want to — or can't — wait to see how this goes.

Sure, publishers tell me, these deals mean we can't sue OpenAI for taking our stuff. But what happens if the courts — or lawmakers — end up undercutting our ability to do that anyway? It's a crapshoot, and we don't know when we're going to find out the results.

And in the meantime, publishers argue, they can go ahead and strike similar deals with other big tech companies that want to use their stuff for their own AI engines. Add all of those up and this might amount to real money, right now.

But the thing I'm most worried about as someone who makes words for a living isn't a replay of the old Facebook/Apple/Google deals publishers now regret. It would be a variation on the theme: the deals all the old media companies did with Netflix back in the early 2010s.

A reminder of how those worked: Back then, big TV networks and movie studios were delighted to sell their old titles to Netflix, which was just getting into the streaming business. The logic: We already sell our old stuff, so this is just a new business partner, and one with a big checkbook. Let's sell them as much as we can!

The problem, as the media companies figured out too late, was that they were helping Netflix build a much better version of their own business: Why watch a show when it airs on ABC when you can wait a little while and see it on Netflix, whenever you want, without any ads?

"'We are basically selling nuclear weapons technology to a third-world country, and now they are using it against us," as Disney CEO Bob Iger put it.

Eventually, many of those same companies stopped selling their content to Netflix, and tried to use those shows and movies to build their own versions of Netflix — an effort that turned out to be expensive and likely too late. (Now, some of them are once again selling their stuff to Netflix because they need any money they can get.)

To me, the parallels here seem quite terrifying for publishers: What happens if consumers become used to getting answers from ChatGPT or other AI engines and stop bothering to visit the sites that generated those answers?

Some publishers I talk to believe that won't happen — that ChatGPT users will want to read their work because their work is original and useful and because ChatGPT won't replicate it in its entirety.

But one publisher I talked to had a more depressing, and perhaps more realistic, response to my "What if you help them become Netflix" question. "They've taken our movies already," the person said.

Translation: OpenAI and other AI companies have already crawled publishers' websites, ingested their content, and used it to train their models. That ship has sailed, the horses have left the barn, etc. All that's left now is to accept that reality and try to make the best deal possible. And if that logic sounds less triumphant and grimly realistic — welcome to media in 2024.

• India's Prime Minister Narendra Modi won a narrower-than-expected reelection victory. 
• But the setback likely won't deter his global ambitions. 
• Modi wants to make India into one of the world's major powers. 

India's Prime Minister Narendra Modi emerged from Tuesday's election with his air of invincibility damaged.

The strongman leader of the world's biggest democracy had been predicted to win reelection for a third term by a landslide.

But his BJP party failed to gain enough seats to claim outright victory, and it will need the support of coalition partners to form a government.

The result, though, is unlikely to deter Modi as he pursues one of the core goals of his decade in power: transforming India into one of the world's most powerful nations.

A leader of the global south

Under Modi, India's growth has put it on the path to becoming the world's third-biggest economy by 2027 — and it has become an important and increasingly abrasive global power player.

Modi wants to position India as a leader of the so-called "global south" of non-Western nations and is seeking a permanent position for India on the UN Security Council as a mark of its new global status.

He has strengthened ties with its traditional ally, the US. He has sought to balance this by forming ties with US adversary Russia and has clashed with Asia's chief power, China.

Modi will seek to cement his foreign policy legacy in his third term.

Countering Chinese aggression

Richard Rossow, an analyst at the Center for Strategic and International Studies, told Business Insider that countering China's aggression and seeking foreign investment will be a key focus.

"India's main priorities will remain unchanged," he said.

Clashes between India and China in 2020 over a long-simmering Himalayan border dispute resulted in 20 deaths. Meanwhile, tensions in the Indian Ocean are escalating, with a recent report finding that China is mapping vast undersea areas in preparation for a potential naval conflict with the rival regional power.

In response, India has entered into the "Quad" strategic partnerships with the US, Australia, Japan, and the UK to counter China's aggression, and it'll be seeking to strengthen its partnerships.

"On security affairs, India wants to continue building partnerships that can help it manage belligerent actions China is taking today and in the future. This includes robust engagement with nations in its own neighborhood, particularly in the maritime domain," Rossow said.

A dark side

India's new assertiveness under Modi has a dark side.

The Washington Post in April reported that India's security services were behind the assassination of a dissident in Canada in June 2023 and the attempted assassination of a Modi critic in the US (India denied this).

Modi's disappointing election result is unlikely to change his often abrasive and aggressive pursuit of foreign goals.

"This election result is unlikely to have much of an impact on India's international security actions," said Rossow.

But there will be serious challenges for Modi in seeking to cement India's new global status.

While strengthening ties with the US, India has also formed closer ties with Vladimir Putin's Russia, buying vast amounts of Russian oil that's been used to fund the Ukraine invasion.

This move has aggravated the US, with reports that Washington has pressured Modi to stop the purchases.

Putin's "no limits" relationship with China's Xi Jinping presents another strategic conundrum for Modi, who seems keen to retain good ties with Putin yet is wary of China's rising global might.

Ensuring regional stability by avoiding war not just with China but also with Pakistan and continuing India's economic rise through vital domestic reforms will be Modi's core challenges in the years ahead.

"India's journey towards true great power capabilities is thus likely to be long and arduous," wrote Ashley J. Tellis, an analyst at the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace.

• Dollar Tree is looking at "strategic alternatives" for Family Dollar, which could include selling the chain, it said Wednesday.
• Analysts have described Family Dollar as Dollar Tree's problem child and say it's been a drag on earnings.
• Last year, Dollar Tree announced plans to close nearly 1,000 Family Dollar stores.

Dollar Tree is considering selling Family Dollar, it announced on Wednesday.

Dollar Tree said that it had started a formal review of "strategic alternatives" for Family Dollar, which it said could include "among others, a potential sale, spin off or other disposition of the business."

Dollar Tree, which bought the rival dollar store in 2015 after a bidding war with Dollar General, said last year that it was carrying out a comprehensive review of Family Dollar, including plans announced earlier this year to close about 970 underperforming stores.

In 2022, federal investigators found a rat infestation at a Family Dollar distribution center. This led to product recalls, temporary closures of some of its stores, a $42 million fine, and mountains of bad press.

A spinoff of the Family Dollar chain will likely be welcome news for investors. Analysts have described Family Dollar as the problem child of Dollar Tree and say it's generally been a drag on company earnings.

"By getting rid of the weight the company voluntarily encumbered itself with when it bought Family Dollar back in 2015, Dollar Tree will be able to focus more squarely on its core business which has better prospects and a much stronger position in the market," Neil Saunders managing director of GlobalData Retail wrote in a note to clients on Wednesday.

He continued: "The saga of Family Dollar is a long and unhappy one. For almost 10 years, Dollar Tree has battled to improve a company that it originally fought so hard to buy, investing an extensive amount of capital and energy. There have been pockets and periods of success but, overall, the trajectory has been entirely unsatisfactory. So, on balance, the decision to cut and run is the right one." 

As of early May, Family Dollar had nearly 8,000 stores. It posted $36.9 million in operating income for the quarter to May 4, compared to $522.3 million for sister company Dollar Tree, which has about 8,500 stores.

• Tesla shareholder Ron Baron has backed Elon Musk's $56 billion pay package. 
• The investor said that without Musk, there would be "no Tesla" in an open letter. 
• Tesla is battling to win over shareholders and ratify Musk's 2018 compensation plan.

Tesla shareholder Ron Baron has backed Elon Musk's $56 billion pay package ahead of a crucial shareholder vote.

The CEO of Baron Capital praised Musk's "relentless drive and uncompromising standards" in an open letter, as Tesla battles to win over shareholders and ratify Musk's 2018 compensation deal after it was struck down by a Delaware court.

The investor said that without Musk, there would be "no Tesla."

This is a breaking news story. Please check back for updates.

• A Manhattan couple who had a child wanted to make their one-bedroom apartment more comfortable.
• After renovations, a movable wall and a Murphy bed transform the living room from day to night.
• The $280,000 renovation carves separate rooms out of 250 square feet, said architect Robert Garneau.

Eight years ago, a Manhattan couple welcomed a child into their lives and faced a dilemma: Move out of their one-bedroom apartment or find a way to make the space work for their growing family.

Unwilling to chance the New York City market — in which homes usually just get more expensive — the couple decided to stay put. But they wanted to create separate sleeping spaces for the growing child and the two working parents, one a clinical psychologist and one an occupational therapist.

Enter architect Robert Garneau, who first experimented with flexible spaces in his own New York City apartment 25 years ago.

"Every project is unique but there's a way of thinking about small spaces," said Garneau, who's worked on over 50 projects across New York City, California, Spain, and France. "You have to consider the space in its entirety, but also down to the square inch to make sure that everything fits properly."

Garneau and his team designed a custom space for the family that allows their main living area to perfectly conceal another bedroom — thanks to a discreet movable wall and Murphy bed.

The whole apartment, located on Manhattan's family-friendly Upper East Side, clocks in at 400 square feet. But Garneau was able to create a flexible space — which functions as a living room with an open kitchen, a bedroom, and an office — out of the main living space, which is just 250 square feet.

Making up the other 150 square feet is the hallway, the bathroom, and the main bedroom, which is the child's.

According to The New York Times, which first profiled the apartment, the couple purchased it in 2006 for around $300,000. The renovation cost about $280,000, Garneau said.

The family has now lived comfortably in the renovated apartment for over two years — take a look inside.

The main living space is about 250 square feet.

The living room can be set up to be one continuous, rectangular living space.

Garneau said there's a 'domino effect' when designing a space this small.

When designing a small space, Garneau recommends starting with the main components of the room and then carving out spaces around them.

In this case, the couple absolutely wanted to keep a leather couch they owned previously and make enough space for their new Murphy bed.

Garneau and his team used those items as a starting point.

Garneau added storage despite the small space by designing some cabinets that are only eight inches deep.

"What's fun in small spaces is you manage to carve space out of things that often don't really get designed," Garneau told Business Insider. "People don't typically build cabinets that are that shallow."

The parents use the storage in the main living room as their closets for clothes and personal items.

Garneau even played with gradients of color to make the room feel brighter.

The cabinets may look all one shade of gray, but there is a slight gradient that brightens the closer you are to the window.

"It's just another one of those games that change the space and how we feel," Garneau told Business Insider.

Leaving patches of exposed brick — rather than putting built-in cabinets everywhere — also helps the space breathe.

Exposed brick is visible above a wooden desk that the parents use as a workspace, with the gray built-in cabinets above that.

"We did everything we could to keep as much of it exposed," Garneau said. "A wonderful piece of wood, some brick, and then the grays with the light — the recipe is there for something that is soothing.'"

The real magic of the space is when the cabinets 'fold' to create an additional bedroom.

Garneau described this ritual of moving the wall as a "preamble."

Configuring the space physically by moving the wall, he pointed out, helps orient yourself to the new dimensions it creates.

The wall clicks into place with strategically placed magnets.

Watching the wall move in person is fascinating.

Garneau said people are often absorbed by the transformation. "It's visceral," he added.

A doorstop locks the wall into place for extra security.

"Normally, the biggest engagement people have with a space is opening the door," Garneau pointed out.

That's not the case here.

In a matter of seconds, the parents' bedroom is complete.

Garneau pointed out that the space created by the foldable wall doesn't have to be a bedroom.

If you keep the Murphy bed up, it could be an office or, with the rocking chair that's already in the apartment, a quiet space to soothe a young child.

A queen-sized Murphy bed is easy to pull down.

Mechanical legs for the bed automatically unfurl as you lower the bed to the ground.

Garneau said Murphy beds have an undeserved stigma and could help many people make the most out of their space.

In a different project, Garneau designed a custom space for actress and television host Laverne Cox that features a "glam" Murphy bed. It was also used to optimize a tight New York City space.

Cox's setup, however, has a button that can be pressed to lower the bed.

Cabinets built into the sides of the Murphy bed again optimize the space.

Garneau said the ritual of bringing down the Murphy bed is a good way to orient your schedule.

"There are kind of chapters in your day, and you engage with space to punctuate that routine," he said.

The parents chose to use this bedroom for themselves and give the unit's traditional bedroom to their child.

The project was fully completed in summer of 2022 and cost around $280,000 to complete, Garneau said.

The living room and bedroom do feel completely separate when the wall is clicked into place.

A door to the left of where Garneau is standing can close to entirely separate the bedroom or office space from the living room.

Even when that door is shut, the living room with the couch and television doesn't feel overly compressed.

Garneau is a firm believer a space doesn't need to be gigantic to feel calm and livable.

"You can live these huge mansions that are cavernous, and they don't feel welcoming," he pointed out.

The Murphy bed goes up as easily as it came down.

The whole process of putting the bed up and moving back the wall was barely two minutes.

The room-within-a-room also collapses easily.

A movable wall was a part of the inspiration from the very first discussions with the couple, Garneau said.

"They had seen the idea of what pivots can do to create and carve space on demand — and open up space again," he explained.

An animated GIF captures the seamless transition from living room to bedroom in its entirety.

The slight gradient in the cabinetry and walls — where it's lighter gray toward the windows and darker gray toward the interior of the apartment — is more apparent in the animation.

Garneau said not everyone can afford to completely customize their space, but small design choices can make a world of difference.

Garneau emphasizes that lighting can make a world of difference in how the eye perceives space.

His team placed LED lighting above the gray built-in cabinetry to draw the eye up. In person, the effect mimics a skyline.

LED lighting inside the cabinetry and closets make the tight spaces feel warm and accessible.

"It makes the world of difference when you open a cabinet and it's luminous, as opposed to, like, 'I can't see anything,'" Garneau explained.

Garneau's team left intentional gaps between furniture pieces.

Another tip from Garneau to create compact, but not overly squeezed, spaces: Leave space between pieces of furniture.

Here, there are a few inches left between the couch and the custom-built wall to prevent the space from feeling "too tense or too extreme."

Garneau took the same measures with the Murphy bed in the foldable bedroom — leaving some space on each side.

• This post originally appeared in the Insider Today newsletter.
• You can sign up for Business Insider's daily newsletter here.

Halfway to the weekend! I hope you never face a layoff scare, but if you do we've got some help. A 20-year HR professional offered advice on what to do when the rumors of cutbacks start swirling. (Save those personal docs!)

In today's big story, we're looking at the latest controversy to embroil OpenAI amid a difficult few months for the startup.

What's on deck:

• Markets: Hedge funds' May report cards are in, and an industry juggernaut faced a setback.
• Tech: This isn't your annoying aunt's Facebook; it's now pitching Gen Z.
• Business: A certain group of Americans believe renting over buying is the way to go.

But first, oh how the tables have turned.

If this was forwarded to you, sign up here.

The big story

Up in arms over OpenAI

The world's most high-profile startup has also become one of its most controversial.

A small group of current and former OpenAI employees signed an open letter to tech companies asking for more transparency and not to retaliate against workers who raise concerns about AI's power.

While there was a sprinkling of Google DeepMind and Anthropic signees, the majority of the group were past and present OpenAI-ers. It marks another controversy for the startup that's been grabbing headlines for all the wrong reasons.

From public spats with Scarlett Johansson and Elon Musk to salty executive exits, Business Insider's Madeline Berg has a full rundown on the chaos at OpenAI this year.

At the center is CEO Sam Altman, whose act is wearing thin in certain tech circles.

Much of the outrage stems from a lack of guardrails around artificial general intelligence, or the idea that tech could ultimately outperform humans at various tasks and capabilities.

OpenAI and Altman have long sought to achieve AGI, but experts warn it could ultimately lead to humanity's extinction.

But how did things turn so quickly for OpenAI?

I asked one venture investor who's spoken to multiple high-profile AI experts. Their takeaway was simple: OpenAI wants to have it both ways regarding how it's perceived about safety and commercialization.

On the one hand, safety is built into the core of the startup. It's structured as a "capped-profit" company governed by a nonprofit, and Altman doesn't hold equity directly in OpenAI. The idea was for OpenAI to pursue building AGI that "is safe and benefits all of humanity."

But the startup's commercial aspirations are clear. It's aggressively pushed out new models to compete with rivals and is reportedly considering adjusting its structure to become a full-blown, for-profit company. It also disbanded the team responsible for mitigating AI risks.

The result, the VC told me, is people feel OpenAI is talking out of both sides of its mouth. In reality, they said, the split between OpenAI's focus on commercialization versus safety feels like it's more 95/5, respectively.

It doesn't help that some OpenAI employees joined when that split was closer to 80/20 and favored safety over business, they added.

The impetus for the increased focus on business isn't entirely clear. But the failed ouster of Altman, which included concerns over safety, does seem like a turning point for the startup.

Whatever the case, OpenAI can't keep trying to sit on both sides of the fence, according to the VC. The tensions are too high between commercial and safety aspirations to straddle the line and not expect more issues, they said.

3 things in markets

1. All the top executives at Millennium Management. Izzy Englander's $64 billion hedge-fund behemoth has grown its leadership ranks considerably over the past decade. BI mapped out Millennium's 47 top executives across its 17 primary offices.
2. Turns out Ken Griffin's Citadel is human after all. The $63 billion hedge fund's flagship fund was down 0.8% last month, several people told BI. Meanwhile, two of Schonfeld's funds enjoyed a strong month. Check out how the top multistrategy managers performed.
3. Maybe we shouldn't celebrate GameStop's comeback. The resurgence in meme stocks is a bad sign for markets, according to JPMorgan strategist Marko Kolanovic. He took issue with how valuations have remained so elevated and reiterated his gloomy stock view.

3 things in tech

1. Hello, youngs. Mark Zuckerberg would like a word. In an attempt to reach Gen Z, Facebook is leaning into TikTok-like discovery, and away from friends and family. It's a strategy that might just work.
2. Elon Musk diverted $500 million in AI processors from Tesla to X. The move, first reported by CNBC, could delay Tesla's development of autonomous vehicles and humanoid robots. It highlights Musk's decision to "build products outside of Tesla" until he has 25% of voting control at the company.
3. Major Google exec makes a shock exit. Google's chief privacy officer, Keith Enright, is leaving the company after 13 years, and the company has no plans to replace him. His move comes as Google's privacy policies have faced scrutiny.

3 things in business

1. Welcome to the golden age for rich renters. It's hard to buy a home right now, but some renters don't care. They've found that instead of buying, they can rent a place with comped parking, boxing gyms, and rooftop pools. And compared to a down payment, the apartments feel like a bargain.
2. Meet the rising stars of sports betting and gaming. As the industry evolves and more states legalize gambling, new roles are being created to meet its growing demands. We profiled 16 people who are driving growth in the field, from responsible gaming to micro betting.
3. No more free internet for Shopify workers. Shopify said it will soon stop reimbursements for employees' internet costs and some other expenses, according to internal docs seen by BI. The expense was introduced during the pandemic, but unlike some of its peers, the company is still remote-first.

In other news

• John Oliver warns India is 'sliding towards authoritarianism' as Modi declares victory in tighter-than-expected election.
• The Great Concert Ticket Bust.
• The 15 companies US business students most want to work for.
• Exclusive: AI video generator Pika is seeking a valuation as high as $700 million in new funding round.
• Ad agency BENlabs has laid off staffers and named a new CEO as the company restructures.

What's happening today

• SpaceX will attempt its fourth suborbital test launch of its prototype Starship vehicle.

The Insider Today team: Dan DeFrancesco, deputy editor and anchor, in New York. Jordan Parker Erb, editor, in New York. Jack Sommers, deputy editor, in London. George Glover, reporter, in London. Annie Smith, associate producer, in London.

• United Airlines' CEO called for an end to the Airbus-Boeing duopoly.
• Scott Kirby said he thinks Boeing made the 737 Max instead of a new model because there wasn't enough competition.
• He doubts the potential of China's Comac to become a world player, instead preferring Brazil's Embraer.

The CEO of United Airlines said he wants to see the end of the Airbus-Boeing duopoly, in an interview on "The Air Show" podcast.

"I think we need more competition in the aerospace business," Scott Kirby said.

He pointed to the Boeing 737 Max as an example of the duopoly's negative impact. Kirby said building on the 737 model — which was first produced in the 1960s — instead of creating a new one was a "fundamental mistake."

"The reason they haven't done it is because, I think — I'm almost certain — is they look at the world and say, 'Well, we have a duopoly. Why would we invest $10 billion in a new airplane in a duopoly?'" he said.

"If there'd have been five aircraft manufacturers, they'd have built an airplane 15 years ago," Kirby told "The Air Show."

"We wouldn't be sitting here today with some of the challenges they've had with the Max," he added. "It's a platform that's older than I am."

Kirby made headlines in January when he said United would take the Boeing 737 Max 10 out of its plans. That came in the wake of the Alaska Airlines blowout, when a Max 9 lost its door plug in midair and sparked huge scrutiny of Boeing.

Certification of the 737 Max 10 has been much delayed, and United's chief financial officer later said the airline would replace them with Max 9 and Airbus A321neo jets.

One potential new competitor to Boeing and Airbus has arisen in China, where Comac has built the country's first homegrown airliner, the C919.

Orders have so far been limited to China and Southeast Asia — although Reuters reported that Saudi officials held discussions with Comac as well.

Kirby, however, is unconvinced. He told "The Air Show" that Comac becoming a global player is "not inevitable, I think it's unlikely."

Instead, he's more bullish about Embraer, the Brazilian planemaker. Its E175 and E190 narrowbody jets are operated by the likes of SkyWest Airlines, the US' largest regional carrier, which is contracted by American, United, and Delta.

Last month, Embraer denied The Wall Street Journal's report that it was looking to build a new narrowbody jet to compete with Boeing and Airbus.

"Embraer certainly has the capability to develop a new narrowbody aircraft. However, we have a young and very successful portfolio of products developed in recent years, and we are really focused on selling those products and making Embraer bigger and stronger," a spokesperson said.

• Russia's foreign minister said French military instructors in Ukraine would be "legitimate targets."
• Sergey Lavrov said he had reasons to think some were already active in Ukraine.
• Russia has threatened nuclear strikes on countries that are considering sending troops to Ukraine.

French military instructors operating in Ukraine would be a "legitimate target" for Russia, Russia's foreign minister, Sergey Lavrov, said on Tuesday.

Lavrov was speaking at a press conference in the Republic of the Congo when he was asked about reports that French instructors would shortly be sent to Ukraine.

"Regardless of whether they are French Army service personnel or just mercenaries, they are an absolutely legitimate target for the Russian Armed Forces," he told reporters, per an official transcript from Russia's Ministry of Foreign Affairs.

"I have reasons to think that they are already active in Ukraine," he said, without giving specifics.

Lavrov's comments came after French President Emmanuel Macron said he was not ruling anything out, including the deployment of NATO troops to help defend Ukraine.

Oleksandr Syrskyi, the commander in chief of Ukraine's armed forces, said in a Telegram post late last month that he had already signed documents allowing French instructors to visit training centers, per a translation by the Kyiv Independent.

Stephen Bryen, a deputy undersecretary for the Department of Defense during the Reagan administration, wrote last month that France had already sent its first troops officially to Ukraine.

But France's Ministry for Europe and Foreign Affairs pushed back in a post on X, saying France had not sent troops to Ukraine, while calling out disinformation campaigns.

Even so, the prospect of sending troops to Ukraine appears to be gaining traction among NATO members.

The Baltic States said they could send troops to Ukraine if Russia made considerable gains on the battlefield, per Der Spiegel.

And Poland's foreign minister said in March that the presence of NATO forces in Ukraine "is not unthinkable" and that he appreciated Macron for not ruling out the idea.

Ukrainian leaders have asked the US and other NATO allies to assist in training 150,000 recruits closer to the front lines for speedier deployment, The New York Times reported last month.

Last month, former Russian President Dmitry Medvedev threatened nuclear attacks on Western capital cities if NATO sends any troops to Ukraine.

He said the "choir of irresponsible bastards from among Western elites calling for sending their troops to the nonexistent country is expanding."

But Estonia's prime minister, Kaja Kallas, a staunch supporter of Ukraine, told the Financial Times that NATO members should not be concerned that sending troops to train Ukrainian soldiers would risk a wider war with Russia.

According to unnamed sources quoted by Le Monde, French authorities are seeking to set up a coalition of countries willing to send military trainers to Ukraine, with a possible announcement coming during the anniversary of the D-Day landings on June 6 and 7.

• Texas is set to get its own stock exchange, The Wall Street Journal reported.
• BlackRock and Citadel have backed the TXSE group, which has raised $120 million, per the report.
• The exchange plans to impose fewer rules and regulations than its New York-based rivals.

Texas is set to get its own stock exchange to rival those in New York, The Wall Street Journal reported.

BlackRock and Citadel are among the backers of the TXSE, which has raised about $120 million from investors and plans to register with the Securities and Exchange Commission later this year, CEO James Lee said.

He told The Journal the exchange would be based in downtown Dallas and aimed to open for trading in 2025.

The group's founders have pledged to have fewer rules and regulations than the New York Stock Exchange and the Nasdaq. Since gaining the SEC's approval in August 2021, the latter exchange has imposed diversity quotas on its constituents.

They're also hoping to appeal to large-cap companies' desire to incorporate in the Lone Star State, which has fewer regulations and more favorable tax policies.

Texas is now home to more Fortune 500 companies than any other state, including mega-caps like Exxon Mobil, AT&T, and Phillips 66.

Tesla CEO Elon Musk said in a post on X earlier this year that he'd call a shareholder vote on moving the electric car-maker's state of incorporation to Texas after a Delaware judge voided his $55 billion pay package.

Lee said that the TXSE would be apolitical, but its proposed launch comes at a time when right-wing culture warriors have taken aim at mainstream financial markets.

Republican presidential candidate Vivek Ramaswamy set up an "anti-woke" investing firm in 2022. Some GOP members have called for funds to pull their money out of BlackRock due to its pro-ESG policies.

• Designers shared the home trends that will be in and out this summer.
• People are gravitating toward bold styles, curves, and water features.
• Minimalism, all-white kitchens, and soft monochromatic looks are falling out of favor.

Renovating a home can be pretty expensive. In fact, the average cost of a project is over $40,000. Before spending that kind of money on upgrades and shopping for new pieces, take a look at what trends are in and out this summer.

To figure out which updates are worth the splurge, Business Insider spoke to four designers. Here's what they said.

Bold styles and patterns will be thriving this summer.

The designers we spoke to said home design is all about taking risks this summer.

"2024 has been about not playing it safe, design-wise," said Sunita Ritesh, founder and principal designer at House of MDC. "I see more textures, bold colors, and patterns."

Designer Elle H-Millard also told BI that bold styles are becoming more popular, citing maximalism luxe — a mix of many pieces to create a luxurious, abundant feel — as a new defining trend. According to H-Millard, more people are mixing color, shape, and patterns to create visual drama.

Greens and blues are making a comeback.

Charmain Bibby, owner and principal designer at Bibby Fine Interiors, predicts that bold greens and blues, especially mixed into colorful and geometric patterns, will make a comeback this season.

H-Millard also thinks nature-inspired colors are on the rise.

"Floral patterns mixed with animals or birds lean into the need to be surrounded by nature, which connects with the biophilic trend that's been increasing since COVID," said H-Millard.

Curves and archways are on the rise.

H-Millard said curves and arches will become more popular in the home this summer. According to the designer, the curves in archways, doors, and hallways create visual warmth and softness in shape.

Indoor and outdoor water features are gaining traction.

Ritesh has seen an increase in water features in the home. Though these features are more commonly seen outdoors, the designer predicts a rising demand for indoor fountains and highlight-wall waterfalls.

According to designer Gillian Ley, founder of Ley Art and Interiors, plunge pools are also trending in outdoor living areas. "Their compact size creates an optimal addition to any outdoor space, which can be used for cold-water plunges, health, relaxation, and well-being," she said.

The designer also told BI that plunge-pool sanctuaries surrounded by outdoor furnishings like speakers, atmospheric night lighting, and decorative privacy panels are becoming increasingly popular.

On the other hand, minimalism is waning.

Though the less-is-more trend has been popular for years, H-Millard said minimalism is out this summer. 

Ritesh also predicts homeowners will move away from the safety of simple minimalism in favor of bolder and louder choices.

White kitchens are losing appeal.

White kitchens have long been a staple in home design, but the designers we spoke to said this trend is waning.

"Don't gasp for air — white will be around forever," said H-Millard. "However, white is now being woven into patterns and composed with positive and negative space."

Ritesh also told BI that she expects white kitchens to fade away and has seen a greater demand for colored cabinets.

Straight lines and narrow spaces are falling out of favor.

Many people are also moving away from straight lines and narrow spaces this summer. According to H-Millard, sharp lines and linear designs lack the open, airy vibe that many people want.

Monochromatic looks are going away.

Popular for its calming ambiance and subtlety, the monochromatic, tone-on-tone look offered serenity during the winter. But as summer heats up, the designers said these subtle looks aren't hitting the sweet spot.

"The vanilla, tone-on-tone monochromatic interiors are definitely fading," said Bibby. The designer expects cream and beige hues to be replaced with more colorful options.