Mark Zuckerberg in 2004, when he launched the "poke" feature on Facebook.
Boston Globe
"Poke" is one of Facebook's oldest features, going back to when it was just for college kids.
In a 2005 interview, Mark Zuckerberg said he came up with the idea while drunk.
Poking is back! Facebook has made it more prominent on the app, and pokes have gone up 13x.
For many of us, the most genius idea we've had while drunk is "we should order pizza." But when a young Mark Zuckerberg over-imbibed, he invented the "poke," the Facebook feature that is both the most creative thing Facebook has done — and one of the creepiest.
The poke was one of the earliest features of Facebook, which Zuckerberg launched in college in 2004 as The Facebook. Poking someone just sends them an alert that the other person gave them a poke. It could be flirty, it could be friendly, it could be just inscrutably weird.
In 2005, when Facebook was still open only to college kids, "CBS Sunday Morning" did a segment about young tech founders, including a young woman who ran a website for camcorder reviews, the creator of the Firefox browser, and a young man named Mark Zuckerberg. In the interview, Zuckerberg describes to the tech journalist David Pogue how Facebook works.
Here's how he describes the poke feature:
There's this feature called poking where you just go to someone's profile and you can poke the person. And, like, what does that do? Nothing. It sends them a message — it's like, "You've been poked."And you know, like, who cares? I mean, it's like, I thought about it when I was drunk or something. And people really like poking each other for some reason that I don't think anyone can really explain.
Meanwhile, improbably, the poke is having a comeback.
Facebook made a design tweak to make the poke button more prominent; it had previously been hidden away and almost impossible to find. It also made it easier to find the page where all your pokes live (try searching "pokes" on Facebook).
The result was that poking went up 13-fold in a short period, and mostly by younger Gen Z users who probably weren't on Facebook the first time the poke was popular.
Ukraine said it struck a powerful Russian electronic warfare system this week.
Footage appears to show it had destroyed a Borisoglebsk-2 EW jamming station.
EW has become increasingly important in the current conflict.
Ukraine's special operations forces (SSO) said on Wednesday that it had targeted a Russian Borisoglebsk-2 electronic warfare (EW) system.
A video shared on the special forces' Telegram channel appears to show a drone striking the system, which Russian news agency Tass described in 2017 as the "technical backbone" of Russia's EW technology.
The SSO's post said that the system was destroyed in the drone strike after troops from the 3rd SSO Regiment had spotted it during a reconnaissance mission in the Donetsk region of eastern Ukraine.
Business Insider was unable to independently verify the location or time of the footage.
The website Army Recognition called the Borisoglebsk-2 a "cornerstone of the Russian Army's electronic warfare arsenal."
The SSO said that the EW system was first used against Ukraine in 2014 during Russia's annexation of the Crimean peninsula.
Electronic warfare, which uses the electromagnetic spectrum to disrupt and degrade an enemy's ability to use signals like radio and infrared, has become crucial in the current conflict as each side looks to neutralize the other's attack and reconnaissance drone capabilities, which have been a key feature of the 25-month-long war.
There have been signs that that is beginning to change, however, with recent reports of Ukraine striking and capturing a Russian tank that was fitted with a makeshift EW system.
Both sides are also now seeking to use AI to bypass EW defenses, developing AI-powered drones that can locate and lock on to targets without communicating with an operator — meaning electronic warfare systems are rendered redundant.
"You cannot jam such a drone because there is nothing to jam," one Ukrainian drone pilot from the 92nd brigade told Reuters.
Soldiers with the 101st Airborne Division (Air Assault) execute a wet gap crossing with the 502nd Multi-Role Bridge Company, 19th Engineering Battalion on Fort Knox on April 28, 2022.
Staff Sgt. Michael Eaddy/US Army
The US Army lacks the equipment and experience to successfully attack across a river.
These capabilities have atrophied and need an overhaul, an Army major argued.
River crossings are dangerous and only getting more difficult.
Assaulting across a river is among the most dangerous military operations. Yet if the US Army went to war tomorrow, it would lack the equipment, doctrine and experience to launch an attack across a defended river, according to one Army engineer.
"The Army has not conducted such an operation since World War II," wrote Maj. Aditya Iyer, an Army engineer, in an essay for the Association of the United States Army. For example, Army divisions don't have adequate bridging capabilities of their own to conduct what the Army calls "wet gap" attacks, and would need support from corps-level units that might not be available.
"The current wet-gap crossing doctrine, organization, materiel and leadership are ineffective for division-level wet-gap crossing operations independent from the corps," Iyer warned. River crossings are especially dangerous because the massed vehicles can be targeted as they funnel across or even become stranded on the far bank against a larger enemy.
As an example of neglecting river assaults, Iyer points to the fiasco of Russia's May 2022 attempt to cross the Siverskyi Donets River, which the 74th Guards Motorized Rifle Brigade tried to storm using mobile pontoon bridges. The result was an estimated 500 casualties and dozens of tanks lost.
Iyer lists multiple mistakes by Russian commanders, including attacking at only one point on the river, lack of prior reconnaissance, and attacking in daytime instead of night. "In contrast, the Ukrainian forces had accurate intelligence that showed the Russian troops massing along the river," Iyer said. "The Ukrainian engineer reconnaissance teams had also identified potential river crossings and had pre-coordinated artillery targets on the crossing sites, and they were right; Russian forces did indeed use those sites."
To be fair, the US Army also has a checkered history with river assaults. At the Battle of Fredericksburg in December 1862, the Union Army made a foolish and bloody attempt to cross the Rappahannock River against entrenched Confederate defenders. In January 1944, the US 36th Infantry Division launched an ill-prepared and disastrous night assault across the Rapido River in Italy that cost almost 2,000 casualties (the furious survivors spurred a congressional investigation after the war).
Indeed, the Army was unprepared for river crossings at the start of World War II. Divisions lacked sufficient bridging equipment — including bridges robust enough to bear the weight of tanks — which made them dependent on corps-level assets. Nor was there a centralized authority to coordinate complex crossing operations. However, by the time of Operation Plunder — the massive assault across the Rhine River in 1945, involving a million men and nearly 6,000 artillery pieces — many of these problems had been rectified. The Rhine crossing even used US Navy landing craft normally used for amphibious assaults on the ocean.
If anything, river crossings are even harder nowadays. The ruses that commanders like Napoleon used — such as surprise descents on a weakly held point, or feints to mask the real crossing point — are much harder when drones are constantly overhead as in Ukraine. If the enemy can spot the crossing, they can blanket the bridgehead with long-range missile and artillery strikes.
This wasn't such a problem in counterinsurgency operations in the mountains and deserts of Afghanistan and Iraq. Major combat operations against Russia and China would be different, especially in regions like Eastern Europe, where there are plenty of rivers and canals. "The Russo-Ukrainian War has highlighted that military technologies have evolved in recent decades and that the U.S. military must be prepared to conduct wet-gap crossing operations against a well-organized and technologically advanced force," said Iyer.
A 3rd Infantry Division Armored Multi-Purpose Vehicle drives off of a 497th Multi-Role Bridge Company, 92nd Engineer Battalion barge on Sept. 21, 2023.
Kevin Larson/US Army
The Army's current wet gap deficiencies resemble those of World War II. Divisions, and the engineer battalions in brigade combat teams, don't have sufficient bridging capabilities of their own. The division is supposed to use at least four Multi-Role Bridge Companies to cross a 400-meter (1,312-foot) river. But those special bridging companies are controlled by corps headquarters.
"Divisions rely on the corps augmentation for wet-gap crossing operations, including other enablers, such as military police and smoke," Iyer noted. Nor does the Army have enough Multi-Role Bridge Companies to support all its divisions.
What's more, many of the Army's bridges, such as the Improved Ribbon Bridge, aren't strong enough to bear the weight of heavy vehicles such as the 70-ton M1 Abrams tank. "The current bridging equipment has the same capability shortfalls that we had in World War II," said Iyer.
The Army also needs a centralized doctrine for river crossing operations that goes beyond merely building the bridge itself, and not how to seize and secure a bridgehead. "Publications remain technically focused on engineer considerations and calculations to execute a crossing," Iyer said.
Simply having the engineering capability to quickly build a bridge across a mile-long river is no minor feat. The question is whether it can be done if the enemy objects.
Michael Peck is a defense writer whose work has appeared in Forbes, Defense News, Foreign Policy magazine, and other publications. He holds an MA in political science from Rutgers Univ. Follow him on Twitter and LinkedIn.
A TikToker says she got stuck in her Tesla for 40 minutes during a software update.
Brandon Bell/Getty Images
A TikToker says she got stuck in her Tesla for 40 minutes during a software update.
Her car was parked in the sun, and during the update she says the temperature inside reached 115°F.
The door has a manual release, but the user guide says opening it during an update can damage the vehicle.
A TikToker says she was "roasting like a freakin' chicken" after she got stuck in her Tesla on a hot day while the car completed its software update.
The TikToker, whose screen name is Brianna Janel, said in a series of videos that she expected the software update to last 24 minutes, according to a message displayed on the internal screen in the vehicle — long enough for her to finish a work call while she waited for her Chick-fil-A order to be ready — but she was still locked inside by the time her call had finished.
"When your car is updating, you're stuck in your car if you activate it while you're in here," Janel said in her first video, which had received 18.3 million views at the time of publication. "So I did that and now I'm stuck in my car literally dripping sweat — like dripping sweat — and inside my car, it's 103 degrees."
According to the Omni Calculator, on a 75-degree day, the internal temperature of a car can reach up to 115°F in just 40 minutes. In Orange County, where Janel said she's from, the weather on the afternoon when she posted the video hit a high of 76°F.
Tesla's user manual alerts owners that some safety features are disabled during software updates and warns not to open the doors or windows while the update is installed, or else "you could damage the vehicle."
The manual doesn't specify what kind of damage could occur, but the Model 3 starts at $38,990 while a Model X starts at $79,990, giving owners a significant financial incentive not to risk it.
"I'm slightly freaking out, I hope I don't run out of air. I can't open up the doors or the windows otherwise, I could potentially damage my car," Janel continued in her viral video. "So yeah. I will be stuck in my car until further notice."
Commenters on the video were split between blaming Janel for refusing to use the emergency manual release and blaming Tesla for what some described as a "huge safety issue."
In a later video, Janel said she had owned her Tesla for about 6 years, but this was the first time she'd decided to update the car while she was inside. By the 30-minute mark, she decided to just "wait it out" because she didn't want to damage the vehicle, though she added she would have opened it if she felt she was actually risking her health.
"I made it out of my car — look, I'm sweating. I'm literally dripping sweat; you can see it on my face," she said in a video update regarding her ordeal. "I just got stuck in my car as it was updating for 40 minutes, and the interior is 115 degrees. The AC has never felt so good and I've never felt better."
Despite the incident, Janel said she still loves her Tesla and calls it "a good vehicle," but she issued a warning to those who came across her video: "Do not update it when you're sitting in the car. Stick to updating it at 2 a.m. like I used to do it."
Janel and representatives for Tesla did not immediately respond to requests for comment from Business Insider.
For weeks, the Georgia representative has threatened to oust Johnson from his chair ever since the House passed a $1.2 trillion government funding bill, arguing that it did not do much to move forward the GOP's priorities such as immigration.
On Friday, Trump tried to ease those tensions with his public endorsement of the Speaker during a press conference at his Mar-a-Lago resort in Florida.
"I stand with the speaker," Trump told reporters as Johnson stood beside the former president.
When asked about Greene's motion to vacate, Trump said that he got along well with both representatives and claimed that Greene sympathized with the difficult job Johnson has faced since he took up the role as Speaker.
"I think he's doing a very good job," Trump said, adding, "I'm sure that Marjorie understands that. She's a very good friend of mine, and I know that she has a lot of respect for the Speaker."
But hours before Trump held his press conference, the Georgia representative repeatedly criticized the Speaker on Steve Bannon's "War Room" show.
Greene excoriated Johnson for Friday's passage of the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act, or FISA, which she said gives the federal government too much power to spy on citizens. She then went on a brief tirade about the coverage she's received from mainstream media and claimed that most Americans would agree with her ideas.
"They know I mean exactly every single word I say, and I'm not full of shit just like Mike Johnson is, and I'm actually going to follow through with action instead of lie to people on television, and in press conferences, and out on the campaign trail," she said.
In March, Greene filed a motion to vacate Johnson only months after the House was thrown into chaos after Rep. Kevin McCarthy was removed from his speakership. Greene previously supported McCarthy's bid to become Speaker and was one of the 210 Republicans who voted to keep the California representative in his seat.
The Boring Company is expanding its tunnel system beneath Las Vegas, a portion of which first opened in 2021.
Ethan Miller/Getty Images
Elon Musk's the Boring Company is in the process of expanding its tunnel system under Las Vegas.
Fortune reported the company mistakenly exposed the base of pillars that support the Vegas monorail.
The monorail was temporarily shut down and the company was issued violations, Fortune reported.
The Boring Company, the startup owned by Elon Musk that is expanding its network of tunnels under Las Vegas, was issued severalviolations from Clark County and accused of creating a "potential hazard" by exposing structural foundations of the Vegas Monorail, according to a new report from Fortune.
The Boring Company opened a 1.7-mile tunnel project in 2021 to transport passengers beneath the Las Vegas Convention Center in Teslas. Now the company is expanding the tunnel system to create the Vegas Loop, which is set to include the LVCC loop and the airport, downtown Vegas, and more, with 68 miles of tunnel approved by the county and city.
However, the expansion has not been without hiccups. Fortune, in part through a Freedom of Information Act request, obtained documents showing workers for the Boring Company mistakenly dug too close to pillars holding up the monorail, a 3.9-mile public transit system along the Vegas Strip.
Clark County issued three violations to the company related to two incidents in June and October of last year, in which the base of monorail pillars had been exposed, the outlet reported.
For the incident on June 15, the county ordered the monorail system to be temporarily suspended. Fortune reported that an engineering firm was brought in to assess the risk, and the following day, a construction company poured a cement mixture over the pillar base area. The monorail reopened on the evening of June 16.
The Boring Company, Clark County, the monorail, and the Las Vegas Convention and Visitors Authority, which owns the monorail, did not respond to requests for comment from Business Insider.
A spokesperson for the Las Vegas Convention and Visitors Authority acknowledged the incidents to Fortune, saying of the June incident that the Boring Company was "fixing a broken irrigation line and inadvertently exposed a Monorail foundation, so we took the correct steps to repair that, including pausing operations for a day."
Regarding the October incident, the spokesperson said concerns were raised but were "unfounded" and that the monorail was not shut down.
"We put the public at risk for anybody who was on that monorail at that time," a former Boring Company employee working near the June incident told Fortune.
The incidents are not the first time safety concerns have been raised about the Boring Company. In February, Fortune also published an investigation in which former employees said they felt unsafe working there.
Some employees were left with scars after they had to travel through two feet of chemical-laced mud that made their skin feel "on fire," according to Bloomberg, citing an investigation by the Occupational Safety and Health Administration.
Donald Trump said Friday he plans to testify in his hush-money trial, set to start Monday.
Trump previously backed out of testifying in his civil fraud trial.
The former president could open himself up to risky cross-examination if he testifies.
Former President Donald Trump on Friday said he will "absolutely" testify in his upcoming Manhattan hush-money trial, which is set to begin jury selection on Monday morning.
But Trump hasn't always kept his testimony promises.
The first of Trump's four pending felony trials is slated to start in Manhattan state court next week, where the former president faces allegations he falsified 34 business records to cover up a $130,000 hush-money payment to porn star Stormy Daniels days before the 2016 election.
In a Friday press conference at Mar-a-Lago, Trump told reporters he plans to testify in the trial, which he called a "scam" and "witch hunt."
"I'm testifying. I tell the truth. All I can do is tell the truth and the truth is they have no case," he said.
Trump's pledge to testify, however, far from assures he will actually take the stand. People familiar with his planning told The New York Times that Trump will likely wait to decide whether he testifies until he sees how strong a case District Attorney Alvin Bragg presents. The former president will also likely make a decision based on whether the judge allows prosecutors to cross examine him on the stand, the outlet reported.
During his December trial on fraud charges in New York civil court, Trump cancelled his testimony just one day before he was supposed to take the stand a second time in the case — an abrupt pivot from his lawyers' previous insistence that Trump would testify again.
Trump is not required to testify in the hush-money case and cross-examination could leave him open to questions about several aspects of the case, including the nature of his relationship with Daniels. If found guilty, Trump could face probation or prison time.
He has pleaded not guilty to the charges and said he never had a sexual relationship with Daniels.
A spokesperson for Trump did not immediately respond to Business Insider's request for comment.
Earlier this year, Trump testified in the defamation trial brought against him by columnist E. Jean Carroll, who accused him of sexually assaulting her. The judge in that case significantly limited what Trump was allowed to say on the stand and later ordered him to pay her $83.3 million.
A subscription to Tesla's Full-Self Driving software — now called FSD (Supervised)to remind drivers that the system requires their attention at all times — is now being offered for $99 a month, down from $199 a month.
It's just one of a few recent moves Tesla has made to hook more people onto the company's Level 2 self-driving system, which requires a driver to constantly monitor the vehicle.
Elon Musk recently mandated all Tesla employees in an internal memo to take new customers on a "short test ride" of FSD before handing over the vehicle during the delivery process.
His rationale was that "almost no one actually realized how well (supervised) FSD actually works," according to the memo that Business Insider confirmed.
In March, the company also announced that it would be giving a free one-month trial of FSD beta to all US customers.
Now, the newly announced discount could make Tesla's controversial driver-assist software more accessible to its customers, which would be beneficial at a time when the company is missing investor expectations and continues to work toward improving its software.
At the beginning of April, Tesla said it had delivered fewer cars in the first three months of 2024, selling 386,800 cars — about 90,000 fewer than investors expected. The company's Q1 performance marks the first year-over-year decline in sales in nearly four years, BI reported.
More customers using Tesla's FSD could also mean more data the company can gather to improve its software, according to TechCrunch.
The discount also marks a departure — even momentarily — from Musk's expectation that Tesla's Full-Self Driving system would only get more expensive.
In 2020, Musk said on X that the value of FSD could reach $100,000 as it "gets closer to full self-driving capability with regulatory approval." It's unclear if Musk was referring to the price per vehicle.
For a moment, that prediction did come to fruition when Musk raised the lifetime service price of FSD from $12,000 to $15,000 in 2022, with a monthly subscription option offered at $199. But last year, the company dropped the lifetime price to $12,000.
A Tesla spokesperson did not respond to a request for comment.
Manhattan District Attorney Alvin Bragg won his latest pretrial victory Friday over Donald Trump
Michael M. Santiago/Getty Images; Brandon Bell/Getty Images
Trump's hush money trial remains on track for Monday jury selection after a decision Friday night.
Judge Juan Merchan denied Trump's bid to delay the trial due to "pretrial publicity."
The judge has yet to rule on one last pretrial delay bid, a defense request that he recuse himself.
Donald Trump's hush money trial remained on track for Monday jury selection after the judge on Friday night denied — in no uncertain terms — a defense bid to delay the trial indefinitely due to prejudicial pretrial publicity.
"This is not tenable," the trial judge, New York Supreme Court Justice Juan Merchan, said in his decision, noting that much of the pretrial publicity has been caused by Trump himself.
Delaying the trial "is simply not an adequate remedy when there is a chance the postponement may become indefinite," the judge wrote, in his most blisteringly-worded decision in the case to date.
Friday night's decision leaves just one potentially trial-delaying matter yet decided before Monday.
But it's the longest of longshots: Trump's request that the judge recuse himself from the case because his daughter is a partner at a Chicago-based political consultancy firm that had repped such big-name Democrats as President Joe Biden and Vice President Kamala Harris.
Merchan had rejected a nearly identical defense recusal motion in August, after the state Advisory Committee on Judicial Ethics found the daughter's independent political activities provided insufficient basis to question the judge's impartiality.
"Defendant appears to take the position that his situation and this case are unique and that the pre-trial publicity will never subside," the judge wrote in Friday's decision.
"However, this view does not align with reality," he wrote.
"In just the past 12 months, Defendant has very publicly been involved in a multitude of criminal and civil cases across several states in both federal and state jurisdictions," he wrote.
"In this County alone, Defendant has had two civil trials, one in State Court and the other in Federal Court," the judge wrote, referring to Trump's previous Manhattan cases — a civil fraud trial and his E. Jean Carroll defamation case.
Losing those two cases resulted in well over a half-billion-dollars in judgments against him. Trump has posted bonds covering both judgments while he appeals.
"In those two matters, he was personally responsible for generating much, if not most, of the surrounding publicity with his public statements, which were often made just a few steps outside the courtroom where the proceedings were being conducted, and with his unrelenting media posts attacking those he perceived to be responsible for his plight," the judge wrote.
"The situation Defendant finds himself in now is not new to him and at least in part, of his own doing."
Defense attorneys Susan Necheles and Todd Blanche had argued that "prejudicial media coverage has saturated the venire," or jury pool, and that Manhattan is "overwhelmingly biased" against him.
They said that a fair jury could not be chosen any time in April, and asked Merchan to delay the trial indefinitely.
"President Trump's Constitutional right to a fair trial is at stake," the defense wrote in a March 18 delay motion that included 180 pages of supporting documents.
Defense-hired pollsters found that 61% of Manhattan potential jurors already believe Trump is guilty of something, nearly twice the rate of surrounding counties, they argued.
Just 35% believed Trump was guilty in the hush-money case specifically.
Prosecutors had questioned the defense poll's methodology, and Merchan on Friday agreed.
The poll "provides no information about how it obtained the contact information of respondents or how it ensured its samples were actually random or representative," the judge wrote.
Prosecutors also argued that the onslaught of pretrial publicity is in large part Trump's own fault, and that jury selection will effectively weed out biased prospective jurors.
"Defendant's own incessant rhetoric is generating significant publicity, and it would be perverse to reward defendant with an adjournment based on media attention he is actively seeking," lawyers for Manhattan District Attorney Alvin Bragg had written in opposing the delay.
Last week, Trump lost a Manhattan appellate court bid for an emergency delay of the trial on pretrial publicity grounds.
That appellate effort is still ongoing and argues that the trial should be moved out of Manhattan altogether.
Trump on Monday is set to become the first former president ever to stand trial on criminal charges.
Prosecutors allege he falsified 34 Trump Organization business records — including invoices, checks, and ledger entries — to hide a $130,000 hush money payment to porn star Stormy Daniels that silenced her just 11 days before the 2016 election.
Trump has denied the charges and Daniels' claim that she was paid to hide a 2006 sexual encounter with the then-Apprentice star.
Travelers waiting for their baggage at Oakland International Airport.
Justin Sullivan/Getty Images
Oakland officials voted to add "San Francisco" to their city's airport name.
San Francisco is not having it.
Oakland officials say the name change would bring more travelers to their airport, bolstering the city's economy.
Oakland Airport wants what San Francisco has — its name.
The Port of Oakland's Board of Commissioners decided in a unanimous vote on Thursday to change the name of their airport from "Metropolitan Oakland International Airport" to "San Francisco Bay Oakland International Airport."
Oakland officials argue that because the name change would more accurately represent the airport's location in the San Francisco Bay, it would increase the airport's traffic, and in turn, bolster the city's economy.
The Port of Oakland estimated in an agenda report that the name change, which would not alter the airport's three-letter code "OAK," would cost $150,000 to implement.
Port officials in Oakland argued that their airport is just as close, if not closer, to many parts of San Francisco as San Francisco's SFO is, when traveling via the Bay Area Rapid Transit system.
But, San Francisco officials don't want to share.
Ahead of Oakland's Thursday vote, San Francisco's city attorney David Chiu posted on X, formerly Twitter, that the name change "would cause immense confusion for travelers and infringes on SFO's trademark."
"If these plans are not abandoned, SF will take legal action," he added. Chiu also wrote a letter to the Oakland Port's Board President and other officials urging them to reconsider.
San Francisco's mayor, London Breed, also formally voiced her opposition in a letter to Oakland officials, taking the time to throw a bit of shade at OAK.
"We encourage Oakland Airport to follow a similar model to SFO and grow its airport services rather than adding 'San Francisco' to its name," Breed wrote.
"Oakland is a great city with a rich history," she added. "It does not need the name San Francisco as part of its airport to stand out."
But Oakland officials say the city actually really does need it.
"I think 30,000 jobs and tax revenue is on the line," Oakland Port board member Yui Hay Lee said before the vote, according to The Wall Street Journal. "The bottom line is we really have no choice. Doing nothing is not an option."
The city of Oakland — which has a population of over 400,000 people, according to the US Census Bureau — has faced serious financial setbacks in recent years.
After closing its largest ever budget shortfall, a deficit of about $360 million last summer, the city has since found a $177 million hole in its two-year fiscal plan, the San Francisco Chronicle reported in March.