• Having work friends has perks for workers and employers alike.
• Gallup's Ben Wigert said people's best friends at work "create a sense of trust, belonging, and connection."
• From work acquaintances to "work spouses," connections have changed amid hybrid and remote work.

Back in the pre-pandemic, full-time office era, Erin Mantz, 54, often had someone at work she could trust, commiserate with, count on, and have fun with — her "work spouse."

"It's not like a dating app," Mantz said. "I wasn't actively out there being like, 'Who can I pick?' It just sort of happened organically."

But now Mantz doesn't have a work spouse at Zeno Group where she's the vice president of employee engagement. While working a hybrid model could be a reason, Mantz speculated it also could be because she's part of an older generation "in a company that skews probably younger," working from a smaller office than many of her coworkers, or because of her level at the company.

With the rise of remote and hybrid work following the pandemic, work relationships have forever changed. Experts told BI that while workers tend to value more flexibility in the workplace — which remote and hybrid work allow — younger workers might gravitate toward in-person roles in the hopes doing so will facilitate social connections and deeper relationships. If they can't, they'll be more likely to experience loneliness.

A lack of work friends can be bad news for workers and employers. Ben Wigert, director of research for Gallup's workplace management practice, said in a written statement that people's best friends at work "create a sense of trust, belonging, and connection."

"Humans need each other and collaborate more effectively when they have real relationships," Wigert said. "If you're worried that a friendship will prevent people from being candid and productive, you have bigger underlying problems on your team. Great teams will attest who you work with makes all the difference."

Wigert noted "disruptive changes from where we work to the pace of work, how we serve our customers, rampant turnover, and a lot of restructuring." It could mean that employees and employers alike need to go the extra mile to build up that camaraderie. Mantz found that it's up to each person to reach out, chat with people, and make an effort to get to know them better.

"Because in this world, this hybrid world — and even if you're not a remote worker, but maybe your company has offices all over the country or all over the world — you're not going to organically be sitting next to someone where you can just chat," Mantz said. "So I think you have to push yourself a little bit to be a little bit more outgoing and interested in people."

How workplace connections have changed

With remote work, developing a work-spouse relationship is much more difficult due to limited in-person interactions.

Vicki Salemi, career expert for job-search site Monster, said in a written statement that this type of connection may be less close when working remotely full-time compared to when working a hybrid model or always working from an office.

"Plus, part of the work spouse relationship involves having that person to have your back, navigate office politics together and more and when you're remote, there are fewer opportunities to interact in person with social dynamics of the office," Salemi said.

Julianna Pillemer, an assistant professor of management and organization at New York University, told BI that the rise of remote work meant we are losing out on the key places that often facilitate closer relationships.

"This might look like the water cooler, the photocopier room, the break room, the hallway where people gather, any space that's just kind of like where people serendipitously bump into each other," she said. "That has traditionally been really important for fostering personal connections between employees."

Still, Pillemer said, relationships aren't all lost with remote work. Connecting through online interfaces like Zoom can allow coworkers to see each other's living spaces and pets, which can often be more intimate than a water cooler chat. The issue often arises when virtual social events end up being a mandatory, overplanned burden; it's not the same as spontaneously deciding to get drinks after work.

"A reason why I think Zoom happy hours backfired so hard is people don't want to feel forced," Pillemer said. "It's mandatory fun."

While some might discount water cooler chats as shallow small talk, Pillemer also noted it could help spark professional development. If a person is frequently in the office and actively looking to connect with others, they might be considered first for a promotion or a big project over someone who is fully remote.

Wigert noted that work best friends, work spouses, and similarly strong work connections can lead to being "more engaged, productive, and committed to their organization."

What work friendships and spouses look like for younger and older workers

Another challenge with the modern workplace is differing demands among generations. Joseph Fuller, a professor at Harvard's Business School and co-leader of the school's Managing the Future of Work Initiative, told BI that while older workers tend to be "a product of routine" and are more comfortable with the pre-pandemic fully in-person work schedule, younger workers are used to the flexibility of the workplace and are less likely to give that up.

But still, Fuller said, "If you are working hybrid a lot, you're not forming friendships, you're not broadening your personal network, you're not meeting people to socialize with, date, whatever else. And so you see in 20-somethings, in a lot of industries, an actual desire to go to the office."

Mantz finds the pros of having a work spouse outweigh the cons and said while it depends on the company and work culture, she thinks people in younger or older generations relative to Gen X don't really have this connection.

"I see a lot of the younger generations having a lot of really great, positive, friendly working relationships with people at the office," Mantz said. "A lot of folks who they work with, they would even call friends, but I think Gen X felt a need to really form alliances. So, while it was important to be friendly with everyone, I think we were a bit more cynical."

If you're new to the workplace and don't want to feel lonely in the workplace or just hoping to make some friends at work, Mantz suggested looking into company offerings, such as mentorship programs or even workplace book clubs. Mantz also advised people to reach out to people outside their generation.

"I think that that's a really important thing to do and not discount, well, that person doesn't seem like me, so I'm not going to make an effort if you will, because it really is a lot about forming relationships and alliances," Mantz said. "Kindness and interest go a long way, and I don't think that changes across the generations."

What is your experience with work friendships, work spouses, and loneliness at work? Reach out to these reporters to share at mhoff@businessinsider.com and asheffey@businessinsider.com.

• When I was younger, I was competitive and ran marathons. I also cycled and enjoyed rock climbing.
• As I've gotten older, I've let go of the need to prove myself. 
• Now, I focus on getting movement in different ways, including paddleboarding and yoga. 

In 1987, I ran the Big Sur Marathon, whose inspired pitch, "Run Along the Edge of the Western World," was irresistible. It was my personal best of the three marathons I had run at the time, clocking in at 3:56.

Running races was typical for me in my 30s when I was highly competitive, achievement-oriented, and needed to prove myself.

I focused on running, cycling, and rock climbing when I was younger

My husband Barry and I also bicycle-toured for years in Europe. I remember how fun it was one year in the Pyrenees, cycling in and out of France and Spain, climbing up to one pass, enjoying the breathtaking views, then zipping down to a charming village. The only trouble was that after our glorious descent, we'd face yet another hill to climb. We cycled uphill and down for two weeks straight. I'm glad that era is over!

Same with climbing Mt. Shasta in northern California, where, as I trudged up the intimidatingly steep icy slope in ill-fitting borrowed crampons, I seriously wondered if I might fall off the face of the earth. "I think I'll pass on Everest," I said to the other hikers when I reached the summit. Their laughter was the best part of the whole climb.

And I'll never forget the women's rock climbing class taught by a lithe, silver-haired woman named Annie. We were climbing a rock face above McCabe's Beach in Marin County. About halfway up the rock, I glanced behind and noticed we were the only clothed humans in sight. A bunch of nude men were playing volleyball and waving at us. Later, we realized it was not only a nude beach, but a gay hangout, because we couldn't see any other women besides ourselves.

Now I have a very different approach to fitness

During my 60s and 70s, I developed a radically different set of priorities. First, I do whatever I can to avoid falling. Three broken joints are more than enough. The first is a seriously compromised ankle from an excruciating landing while skydiving near Mt. Rainier 40 years ago. After my surgery, the orthopedist told me, "I put together everything I could recognize."

Thirty years later, another surgeon said that based on my X-rays, he assumed I'd be on crutches, but because I was so active, my ankle was pretty healthy, despite virtually no cartilage. "But no more running!" he added.

The other two falls were less traumatic. I fractured my pinky when I fell while running down a trail and my wrist when my Teva sandal got caught in a sidewalk crack.

Despite my active lifestyle, I have osteopenia, so I do strengthening yoga, weight-bearing exercises, and the Alexander technique, a mind-body modality that promotes good posture.

I still do hard things

The fact that I'm no longer competitive doesn't mean I'm just lying around. I subscribe to the message of a popular book titled "Do Hard Things." If I'm cycling up a hill, I tell myself, "Don't give up til your legs do!" Or if I feel like heading home while on my stand-up paddleboard, I'll say, "Come on, girl! You're not done yet!"

I spend more time in the water

I used to do most of my movement on land. But in recent years, I switched from running to open-water swimming, which morphed into paddleboarding, now one of my favorite fitness activities. It feels more like a spiritual practice than a form of conditioning, though.

I wander around Humboldt Bay, two blocks from our apartment in Eureka, California, and greet the seals (who look skeptically at this strange vertical being), admire herons, and, during high tide, paddle through an otherworldly slough with tiny crisscrossing waterways. Water is the ideal place to be when "the world is too much with us," as Wordsworth said.

Above all, I keep moving

If I had any advice to offer, it's this: do whatever it takes to keep moving. For myself, I increasingly want to be active outside, preferably in places of natural beauty. One exception is wandering for hours (alright, an hour!) along the over 3,000 windy, souk-like alleys in Guanajuato, the Mexican city where Barry and I live part time. I love these streets so much that I take people on tours.

Like the centenarians whose lifestyle I emulate, I avoid "exercise," which is a modern concept: artificial, timed, and structured. Instead I do what the body longs to do, which is navigate my environment on foot. Heading to the library, the bank, or yoga class, I stride along, singing childhood songs like "I Am A Poor Wayfaring Stranger" and "I Love to Go A-Wandering." Walking relaxes me when I'm tense, focuses me when distracted, and wakes me up when lethargic.

After all, what is a brisk walk but following in the steps of the ancients, joining the long line of bipeds before us, who headed outside, putting one foot in front of the other? The timeless practice of walking steadies and sustains me.

• Companies often want to signal they're growing or to let overworked employees think help is coming.
• But three in 10 companies have fake job listings, according to a Resume Builder survey.
• Fake listings can undermine trust — but sometimes lead to real interviews and employment. 

That job you applied for might be a mirage.

Companies often post bogus roles to ease employees' concerns about being overworked and signal that the organization is growing, said Resume Builder, which recently found three in 10 employers have fake job listings.

Resume Builder, which offers résumé templates, surveyed nearly 650 hiring managers in May and found nearly seven in 10 said it was "morally acceptable" to post fake jobs. Hiring managers credited the move with increasing revenue, morale, and how much workers get done.

Yet, Stacie Haller, Resume Builder's chief career advisor, told Business Insider that the practice could — no surprise — undermine confidence among existing and would-be employees.

"The last people you want to be sharing fake information to your staff is the HR people," she said.

The prominence of sham listings highlights the challenges many people, particularly desk workers in industries like tech, face in finding jobs. The overall labor market remains strong, but it's not a game of workers' choice like it was a few years ago when more employers were fighting for people.

Everybody's doing it

Haller said it's long been common for staffing firms to fish for talent with dummy listings. That way, when a client calls needing workers, the agency has people ready to go.

But now, Haller said, companies beyond staffing firms appear to be adopting the practice, which can frustrate job seekers and erode trust with workers.

The listings spanned entry-level positions to executive roles, according to the survey.

The reasons for listing fake jobs included signaling that the employer was willing to hire from outside the organization. Yet about six in 10 respondents also said companies wanted to make overworked employees think help was on the way — and that they could be replaced.

"Some people are saying, 'Well, it increased productivity.' And I'm thinking, 'Well, does it do it out of fear?'" Haller said.

She said it's a stretch to think that ghost listings would do a lot to boost morale among workers by making them believe the organization was growing.

About six in 10 hiring managers said the intent was to scoop up résumés for when a role opens. Haller said there's no issue collecting the information, provided employers are upfront about it.

"Why not be honest?" she said.

Haller said employers that dangle fake listings risk hurting themselves by undermining their reputations.

One reason is simply that companies often get caught. Two-thirds of hiring managers said those they meant to dupe, including workers, investors, and job seekers, figured out they were being hoodwinked.

Fake listings can lead to real jobs

About seven in 10 of the fake jobs were on a company website or LinkedIn, according to the survey. And, yet, despite all the shenanigans, many fake listings often lead to real interviews — and even employment.

Four in 10 hiring managers said they always contacted workers who applied for made-up jobs. Forty-five percent said they sometimes contacted those job seekers. Among companies that contacted applicants, 85% report interviewing the person.

"A lot of them are getting contacted and interviewed at some point, so it's not necessarily a black box," Haller said.

How you can spot a sham listing

Haller said it's best to try to determine who posted a job. Going to the hiring manager on LinkedIn or to someone you know at the company is often a better route than applying cold, anyway, she said. And look when the job was listed.

"If it was five months ago, and it's still up there, it's fake," she said.

Of course, not every unanswered job submission indicates that a listing isn't real. Sometimes, the problem isn't the worker but the CV, Haller said.

"It's easy to say, 'I sent out 500 résumés and got nothing.' And then I look at the résumé and they have an AOL address, and it's 20 pages, and I have no idea what they want to do. So, 'No, you're not getting a response,'" she said.

Haller lamented fictional aspects to any part of the job equation.

"'People lie on their résumés. So what?' That's horrifying. Hiring managers lie to hire people. 'Oh, we have great benefits, and you'll get promoted.' And it's a lie. None of this is acceptable," she said.

Haller is optimistic that Gen Z workers, who are expected to outnumber full-time boomers in the labor force in 2024, will demand change because surveys indicate many young people share an interest in preserving their mental health and in employers being open with their people.

"The new generation coming up isn't going to stand for this," she said.

That's a good thing, Haller said. "Anytime I see the word 'fake' in any part of the hiring process, it's alarming."

• Angela Babin, 62, struggles to live on $1,104 a month in Social Security and $28 in SNAP. 
• Her experience highlights a growing crisis, as many older adults don't have enough retirement savings. 
• More than half of Americans over 65 have an annual income of $30,000 or less, per the Census Bureau.

Angela Babin lives in a mobile home in Houma, Louisiana — about 60 miles southwest of New Orleans.

Her heating and electricity haven't worked very well since Hurricane Ida swept through the area three years ago, and she has to boil all her water on the stove to be able to drink or use it. It makes her nervous: she has arthritis and she's worried she could burn herself trying to move a still-bubbling pot.

Babin, 62, lives alone. She has for years, ever since her mother and brother died. The three of them used to live together, with Babin as their caregiver. They were the only family she had left, she said.

Now, Babin is kept company by her two cats and two dogs, who "mean the world" to her. She lives on her Social Security income, which she first started receiving in 2008 after she had to retire early for medical reasons. According to documents reviewed by Business Insider, the check comes out to $1,104 a month.

Even with the Social Security check and some SNAP food benefits, Babin said it's difficult to afford groceries. She rarely has any new clothes and hasn't been able to afford a haircut in years.

"I have to survive," she said. "I have no choice."

Babin's experience mirrors others BI has heard. A growing number of older adults in the US are facing a retirement crisis, as limited or nonexistent savings accounts require many to depend on Social Security — a federal fund that could start shrinking by 2030.

Peak boomers, the latest cohort of older adults under 65 to retire, are especially vulnerable to these retirement challenges. The Census Bureau's Current Population Survey found that more than half of Americans over 65 have an annual income of $30,000 or less.

Babin said she "never in a million years" thought she would be in this financial situation.

Babin's mobile home needs repairs, but she struggles with daily expenses

About 16 years ago, Babin and her husband divorced. She lost most of her assets in the settlement and was forced to stop work and start collecting Social Security around that time due to complications from diabetes. She has no remaining savings.

Like the millions of other older Americans living on a fixed Social Security income, Babin said it's difficult to get by.

When Hurricane Ida hit southeastern Louisiana in 2021, the mobile home Babin owns was badly damaged. The repairs are expensive and she hasn't been able to get much of it fixed since the storm. That's why her hot water doesn't work, she said.

Babin also worries about having enough to eat. She said she receives $28 a month in SNAP benefits, but that's barely enough to cover bread, milk, and coffee. Occasionally, Babin visits food pantries, but she said the food is often spoiled, or she can't eat the items available due to her diabetes.

For healthcare, Babin is enrolled in Medicaid and Medicare, which covers most of her healthcare and insulin costs. She has a car, but typically only drives to essential places like the doctor's office because she can barely afford gas.

ADDED:It's especially difficult for single people and older adults to qualify for assistance. Many US safety nets are set up for families with young, dependent children.

Babin, for example, Babin can't access programs like WIC (Special Supplemental Nutrition Program for Women, Infants, and Children), TANF (Temporary Assistance for Needy Families), and some tax credits because she lives alone. And, even though her Social Security income is close enough to the poverty line to qualify for SNAP, the support she receives is limited — and it can't help cover her other expenses.

With limited options for help, Babin she feels stuck.

"I don't want to be rich, I just need to be comfortable," she said. "I just want to know that I can have food when I need it and a nice roof over my head."

Are you living paycheck to paycheck or on Social Security? Are you open to sharing how you spend your money? If so, reach out to this reporter at allisonkelly@businessinsider.com.

• Ukraine is trapped in a strategy that favors Russia, a Ukrainian security expert argues.
• Without a grand strategy for victory, the most that Ukraine can do is try to hold on.
• "The lack of a strategy for victory will turn this war into a war of attrition," Oleksandr Danylyuk told BI.

Ukraine is caught in a strategic trap. It barely has the strength to keep Russia from making major advances, yet it is not strong enough to eject Russian forces from the territory it held prior to the 2022 invasion. The result is a war of attrition that Ukraine can't win.

The solution? Build up Ukrainian military power and compel Russia to agree to peace, argues a Ukrainian security expert. But that can't happen unless Ukraine devises a grand strategy that extends beyond mere survival that's characterized much of the war in 2024 as Russia exploited the long delay of US arms support.

"The lack of a strategy for victory will turn this war into a war of attrition for Ukraine, which completely coincides with Russian interests," Oleksandr Danylyuk told Business Insider.

Danylyuk dismisses the notion that even with Western aid, Ukraine can match Russia in the sheer numbers of military power like tanks, artillery and troops. "Trying to win a war with Russia at the expense of only a symmetrical mass increase is a flawed strategy, given that Russia has a larger number of [military-age] human reserves (about 30 million people in Russia, compared to about 8 million people in Ukraine), significant stockpiles of weapons and military equipment inherited from the USSR or built by 2022, as well as a developed defense-industrial complex and a powerful mining industry that satisfies its needs for a significant amount of strategic materials," he wrote in an essay for the Royal United Services Institute, a British think tank.

That leaves improving the quality of Ukraine's military. But this involves more than better weapons and tactics. Danylyuk argues that political mobilization is just as important, a view that seems reminiscent of the 19th Century German military philosopher Carl von Clausewitz, who envisioned a nation's war effort as a trinity comprised of the people, government and military.

"The political effectiveness of a military organization consists of its ability to receive financial support, the provision of weapons and military equipment, and the replenishment of human forces in the volume and quality necessary to eliminate existing threats," Danylyuk wrote. However, "the political effectiveness of the [Armed Forces of Ukraine] remains insufficient, as Ukraine's defense needs are currently only partially met."

Danylyuk blames Western restrictions on the types of weapons being supplied, and how they can be used. The US and Europe have long imposed restraints on using long-range weapons, such as ATACMS long-range guided rockets, to hit targets deep inside Russia. Only recently has the Biden administration begun to relax that policy. Easy victories with Western weapons have failed to materialize as the war has dug in. It's also clear that even with robust EU and US support, Ukraine is still at a disadvantage against the Russian war machine in a years-long fight.

Danylyuk also worries that political divergences between Ukraine and its allies are undermining Ukrainian military effectiveness. Ukraine's current government wants to liberate all occupied territory, which is "undeniably fair and rational, but it ignores the fact that the liberation of territory does not necessarily mean the end of the war," he wrote. On the other hand, US and European desires for a negotiated settlement "will be viewed by Russia as a tactical respite which can be used to restore and build capabilities and plan a new phase of aggression."

In other words, Russia could exploit a peace deal to rebuild its battered forces before launching another invasion of Ukrainian lands.

The result is that the Ukrainian military isn't sure what kind of war to prepare for. "The AFU are in an extremely difficult situation, as the political leaderships of both Ukraine and its partner countries see these goals in different ways, which negatively affects the ability of the AFU to develop and implement a military strategy aimed at achieving them," wrote Danylyuk.

Without a grand strategy for victory, the most that Ukraine can do is hold its own, Danylyuk told Business Insider. "The planning of individual operations, the assessment and provision of the needs of the AFU, the development of training programs and preparation, and the introduction of new tactical techniques can at best support Ukraine's ability to conduct the war, but not to win it."

There are too many competing visions of Ukrainian victory, he argues. These include retaking all lost Ukrainian territory, threatening Russia's hold on Crimea to force it into negotiations, punishing Russian industry and exports to try to force Russians to reconsider the war's costs, or exacting such a heavy toll that Russian leaders are compelled to withdraw similar to the Soviet pullout from Afghanistan.

Danylyuk does fault Ukraine for some military mistakes, such as failure to adequately prepare and train for the failed counteroffensive against well-entrenched Russian forces in summer 2023. But he considers tactical improvements to be at the bottom of Ukraine's to-do list.

The West can boost Ukrainian military power by focusing on weapons that have already proven devastating against Russian vulnerabilities, according to Danylyuk. This includes cheap naval drones that have sunk numerous Russian warships and driven Russia's Black Sea Fleet from the Ukrainian coast, as well as giving Ukraine more Western aircraft and air-to-air missiles to contest Russian airpower.

Interestingly, Danylyuk blames the West for failing to adapt its equipment to the lessons of the Ukraine war. "This concerns, first of all, their ability to quickly improve military equipment not only because Ukraine needs it, but also because the security of the partners themselves depends on its improvement. The current pace of this improvement is completely unsatisfactory, and the approaches to identifying and eliminating the shortcomings of such systems require a complete revision."

Danylyuk's analysis does leave some questions unanswered. For example, as the Germans discovered on the Eastern Front in World War II, quality doesn't always triumph over quantity. And as Ukraine's failed 2023 counteroffensive demonstrated, achieving decisive battlefield success is no easy matter. With Russian society mobilized for total war, and with Moscow able to procure resources from allies such as China, North Korea and Iran, Russia's ability to wage a long war is considerable.

Also, choosing a grand strategy is easier said than done. For example, the Ukrainian government vows to liberate all occupied territory, including the Crimean peninsula and eastern Ukraine which Russia has annexed. Some critics say this is unrealistic, and Ukraine will have to accept some loss of territory.

Whatever strategy Kyiv chooses, Danylyuk argues, it can't be the status quo.

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.

• I recently went on my first cruise with my parents, sister, and grandmother. 
• I'd never been on a cruise before and was surprised that there were things for all of us to enjoy.
• We all had a good time and I'll treasure the memories we made together. 

Until last month, I had never been on a cruise. Neither had my parents or my sister, but my grandmother — my nan — often travels by cruise ship, so we decided to join her on a cruise.

We decided on a trip to the Norwegian fjords, which we all wanted to see, and traveled on the 5,206-capacity Iona — the UK's largest cruise ship until 2022.

It was the first time we'd all gone on vacation as a family of five. My 16-year-old sister, me at 25, my parents — both 50 — and my nan, who is 72 — were there.

The environment took some adjusting

The cruise took us a couple of days to get used to. The idea of being at sea felt almost claustrophobic when compared to the pedestrian-friendly city vacations I'm used to, and my nan didn't adjust to the sheer number of children (and the noise) on board at first, because she's used to going on cruises when children are at school.

But we gradually found a rhythm. My family are early risers, but I don't usually eat breakfast, so I'd wake up with them, have a coffee in bed, and then head to the gym while they went to get food. If we were spending a day in a port, we'd enjoy a few hours exploring, probably getting a coffee or some lunch, before heading back on the ship for the rest of the day.

There were plenty of places on the ship where I could spend some time by myself, too. There was an adults-only area on one of the top decks, so as we were blessed with surprisingly good weather, I'd go up there, order a beer or a cocktail, and read my book in the sun. I also enjoyed spending time in one of the quieter bars on the ship. I bought the WiFi package largely so I could keep in touch with my girlfriend and keep an eye on emails, but it also allowed me to kill some time scrolling social media or checking the soccer news.

It was good to spend more time with my family

I was a little nervous about spending so much time with my family. Apart from a short trip to Madrid with my dad last year, it was the first trip I'd taken with my parents and sister in two years, and the first with my nan since 2015.

It wasn't always easy to go without the space I'm used to — and to go longer than usual without seeing my girlfriend — but the trade-off of seeing more of my family was worth it. The trip was only for a week, and it was good to spend time with both of my parents, as well as my sister, who, at 16, is getting older and looking toward university. I liked spending more time with my nan, too, particularly now that she's in her 70s and is still in good health.

Now that we're back, I find myself missing the trip. While there are aspects of being on a cruise that I don't necessarily love — the bars and restaurants can start to feel a bit samey after a while, for example — there was a lot that I enjoyed.

The places we visited were unforgettable, too. From riding the Skylift in the village of Loen and taking in the picturesque surroundings to visiting the coolest coffee shop in Stavanger, one of Norway's biggest cities, there were some great destinations I probably would never have visited had we not decided to go for the cruise.

I always associated cruises with retired couples and families with young children, but I found plenty to do as someone in their 20s, particularly because I wanted a relaxing vacation. And being able to spend time with my family made it all the more memorable.

• Rihab Lajmi left her role at Google and launched FAANG, an AI hiring platform.
• Lajmi has gone through dozens of interviews herself and interviewed 35 recruiters to learn what they're looking for.
• These are the five interview tips she recommends to job seekers.

This as-told-to essay is based on a conversation with Rihab Lajmi, a 26-year-old living in Germany. Her employment history has been verified by BI. It's been edited for length and clarity.

You may have heard of FAANG being used as an acronym for Facebook, Amazon, Apple, Netflix, and Google — and that's exactly what inspired the name of my company.

FAANG jobs are highly coveted and represent success in tech. So about six months ago, I quit my job as a Cloud space architect at Google to create an AI recruiting platform to help people land their dream jobs.

Our conversational AI recruiter "Buddy" conducts custom simulated video interviews for job applicants based on the company's preferences, culture, and technical needs. Our vision is to scale "Buddy" to become every job seeker's companion to prepare for job interviews.

By adopting this name, we aim to empower individuals to achieve their career aspirations, whether at FAANG or elsewhere. So far, we've interviewed over 35 recruiters to learn more about what they're looking for.

Before Google, I worked at Microsoft and went through dozens of interviews at other companies like Amazon. Through my own experience and from speaking with recruiters directly, these are my biggest takeaways on how to excel in an interview.

1. Request a champion call with the hiring manager

In many interview processes, the hiring manager won't show up until the final round of interviews. That person often has the final say so it's good practice to increase your visibility early on.

If you don't have a call scheduled with the hiring manager prior to the first interview, request it. This breaks the ice and helps them remember you later.

The call should be casual and you should start by introducing yourself. Then, you can ask about them and what they're looking for. This will also help you get more information as you go through the interview process.

2. Begin the interview with small talk

Starting with small talk may help the interviewer remember you later on. You can start by asking the interviewer questions about the company or you can try a less formal approach if they seem open.

A lot of the people I've worked with have been international so I often start with questions about where they're from and then mention my favorite dish from that region.

Make sure you read the room and don't let the small talk go on for too long. Some interviewers like to chat more than others so make sure to pay attention to verbal cues.

3. Be concise

People often look at interviews like an exam — don't go into it with that approach. While you should do your homework and prepare for the interview, it's important that you don't get bogged down by the details.

The person who is interviewing you will lose their focus if you talk too much. They also are assessing your ability to communicate so being concise can help you score higher or make a better impression.

4. Weave in your personality when answering questions

The company wants to get to know you as a person. So when it comes to behavioral questions, do your best to weave in stories and examples that highlight parts of your personality.

For example, if someone asks about a time you had to work through a conflict, don't put an emphasis on the problem or the solution. Instead, make sure you focus on how you went about solving the problem and how you communicated.

5. Don't follow up right after the interview

Don't follow up with a recruiter right after the interview and don't contact them more than twice. It could take a while to make the decision, especially if it's a competitive role, and if you appear overly eager you could lose leverage power with salary negotiation.

Do you work at Google? We want to hear from you. Email the reporter from a non-work email at aaltchek@insider.com.

• Clarence Thomas this week argued domestic abusers shouldn't be prevented from owning guns.
• His lone dissent in the 8-1 SCOTUS decision hinged on an originalist interpretation of the law.
• One legal expert told BI Thomas's ruling shows how "absurd" originalism can be.

Clarence Thomas this week offered the lone dissent in a Supreme Court decision that ultimately ruled that people with a history of domestic violence can be prevented from legally owning guns.

His lengthy disagreement with the ruling in United States vs. Rahimi hinged on an originalist interpretation of the law that Thomas, a staunch conservative, is known for.

Originalism is a legal framework based on interpreting constitutional law as it would have been understood at the time it was written nearly 250 years ago — before the invention of electric lighting, indoor plumbing, and steam-powered trains.

Once considered a fringe theory created in response to perceived overreach by a liberal court, this method of interpretation — popularized by the late Antonin Scalia in the late 1980s — argues that only a formal Amendment ratified by Congress should be able to alter how we interpret the Constitution's established rights and restrictions.

Legal experts who spoke to Business Insider said Thomas's latest decision highlighted how inconsistent and even ridiculous this method of interpretation can be.

"This is a case where, if you invalidate this statute on the basis of originalism, you go back in time and say, essentially, at the time of the original ratification of the Constitution, domestic violence was tolerated — and therefore, based on originalism, we need to invalidate the statute," John P. Gross, a professor at the University of Wisconsin Law School and director of the Public Defender Project, told Business Insider. "And that is, of course, an absurd, horrible result."

Gross noted that originalism raises questions like whether women should be allowed to sit on the Supreme Court, because the nation's founders wouldn't have allowed it then.

"A strict originalist view could be that we shouldn't have appointed women to the judiciary unless we get a formal Amendment saying women can be judges," Gross said. "So that's the kind of logical extension of originalism that leads to these truly absurd results. In that context, it's very difficult to defend originalism as a useful, meaningful way of interpreting the Constitution."

With originalism, 'you get absurd results, and people will think you are a nut'

Three legal experts told BI that Thomas is at least consistent in his framework for interpreting the law. However, this consistency in his thinking allows him to present arguments at odds with modern values that can sometimes contradict each other.

"This is a court that claims to be an originalist court and, if nothing else, these opinions establish that originalism is not a straightforward approach and does not lead to greater certainty, despite the claims that originalists make," Carolyn Shapiro, founder of Chicago-Kent College of Law's Institute on the Supreme Court of the United States, told BI.

Shapiro said originalism "can lead to different results depending on who is doing the analysis. It just simply does not provide the certainty that originalists claim."

Thomas' strict originalist interpretations in recent rulings, such as a unanimous decision in a trademark case earlier this month, have also begun to cause a fray among the other conservative justices. CNN reported Amy Coney Barrett, who identified as an originalist when she took the bench in 2020, accused Thomas in a recent opinion of having a "laser-like focus on the history" that "misses the forest for the trees."

Thomas' reliance on "history and tradition," Barrett wrote in a concurrence that the court's three liberal justices signed on to, "is wrong twice over."

Thomas being the lone dissent in the case involving domestic abusers carrying firearms shows how committed he is to his originalist framework, even when the other conservative justices on the court clearly see the risk to society if SCOTUS doesn't modernize its thinking, Gross said.

Gross noted that he expected the outcome the Supreme Court ultimately reached, though he was surprised Justice Samuel Alito, another strict originalist, didn't join Thomas' dissent.

"I think perhaps Alito's absence from this opinion suggests that even he realizes, as Justice Scalia did at some point, that if you keep pushing these ideas about originalism, you get absurd results — and people will think you are a nut," Gross told BI. "But Thomas is willing to go there. In terms of intellectual purity, great, I can't say the guy's wishy-washy, but even Alito's not part of it — because he doesn't want to be seen as a nut."

Representatives for the Supreme Court did not respond to a request for comment from Business Insider.

• Earlier this month, David Sacks posted an open letter on Twitter in support of Donald Trump. 
• In a scathing post on Thursday, LinkedIn cofounder Reid Hoffman took the letter apart line by line.
• Venture capitalist Sacks, Hoffman said, gets it wrong about Trump "on just about every count."

LinkedIn cofounder Reid Hoffman had some choice words for venture capitalist David Sacks after he endorsed Donald Trump earlier this month.

In an open letter posted on X on June 6, Sacks praised the former president's foreign policy and economic strategy and lambasted President Joe Biden's approach to "lawfare," accusing Biden of leveraging the justice system against his political opponent in this year's election.

Hoffman was having none of it, writing in a separate post on Threads that Sacks, in voicing his support for Trump, "got it wrong on just about every count."

"Since Silicon Valley mostly opposes Trump, he may have seen this as a 'contrarian' take that would fit his podcast brand," Hoffman wrote in an extended Medium post published the same day as his Threads remarks in response to Sacks' letter. "Sadly, rather than originality, Sacks' letter awkwardly regurgitates pro-Trump groupthink."

"Both of America's choices for President are old, but only one of them acts like an adult," Hoffman added.

Point by point, Hoffman dismantled Sacks' argument, pointing out that Trump became a convicted felon after being found guilty by a jury of his peers, comparing economic and crime data from the last two administrations, and accusing Sacks of echoing pro-Putin propaganda in his defense of Trump.

"The voters have experienced four years of President Trump and four years of President Biden," Sacks wrote in his letter. "In tech, we call this an A/B test. With respect to economic policy, foreign policy, border policy, and legal fairness, Trump performed better. He is the President who deserves a second term."

Hoffman sharply responded in his posts that Sacks "is reading the results backwards."

"In tech, we call this 'being wrong,'" Hoffman wrote.

Sacks hasn't responded at length to Hoffman's disapproval, though he did reply to a post on X critiquing Hoffman for taking two weeks to pen his rebuttal, simply adding the "100" emoji in agreement.

Sacks' support for Trump — and Hoffman's vocal condemnation for it — comes as a growing faction of Silicon Valley elites have voiced their support for the former president post-conviction.

It isn't the first time Hoffman has critically weighed in on the phenomenon. In an op-ed published in The Economist earlier this month, Hoffman blasted business leaders for supporting Trump, arguing that a Republican win in 2024 will be bad for the economy and could upend the legal system that American businesses rely on.

Hoffman and Sacks did not immediately respond to requests for comment from Business Insider.

• The Titanic wreckage site continues to be a big draw for the wealthy and adventurous.
• But experienced deep-sea explorers tell Business Insider there's nothing more to see there.
• Hot sea vents and deep-water coral reefs are under-explored and far more accessible, explorers say.

The Titanic may be one of the most popular and identifiable wreckage sites in the history of sea travel.

It also may be one of the most overrated, deep-sea explorers told Business Insider.

More than a century after the ocean liner sank to the bottom of the Atlantic, the Titanic has proven the staying power of its lore, not least in part due to James Cameron's 1997 film, which became the first billion-dollar box office success. The film reignited interest in the ship and created a fandom that lives strong to this day. Titanic-themed birthday, anyone?

Then, in 2023, five people died in OceanGate's Titan submersible during a dive to the wreckage site, once again placing the iconic ship at the forefront of the news cycle.

Despite the wreckage's thorough documentation and the recent fate of the OceanGate submersible, the wealthy and well-resourced continue to pour efforts to venture 12,500 feet into the ocean just to see the site of the 1912 sinking.

Passengers on the Titan paid up to $250,000 for a seat inside the submersible. Now, billionaire real estate investor Larry Connor said he will voyage to the Titanic.

Deep-sea explorers are left wondering: Why?

'People are trying to impress people'

"The wreck is well-documented," Karl Stanley, a submersible expert, told BI in a recent interview. "That's probably the best documented deep-water wreck there is."

Stanley, who owns a submersible tourism company, Stanley Submarines, was one of many colleagues who warned OceanGate's CEO Stockton Rush about the dangers of rushing to produce a vessel that could take people to the Titanic.

For him, the wealthy's desire to visit the shipwreck has less to do with a genuine passion for deep-sea exploration and more to do with namesake recognition.

"I think whatever market exists for tourism to the Titanic is extremely analogous to the kind of clientele that pays Sherpas to drag them up Mt. Everest," Stanley said, referring to the Nepalese ethnic group that dwells in the Himalayan mountains. Some climbers pay up to $15,000 per expedition to have a Sherpa guide, BI previously reported.

Since the early 1900s, more than 330 people have died on the mountain, and 107 of them were Sherpas, according to The Himalayan Database.

Stanley said there are more dangerous but less traveled mountains and shipwrecks that are less deep but better preserved, such as the HMHS Britannic, Titanic's sister ship, which lies in a relatively shallow grave of about 400 feet, near the Greek island of Kea.

"People are trying to impress people," he said.

Guillermo Söhnlein, the cofounder of OceanGate who left the company in 2013, agreed with Stanley.

While he doesn't want to discourage anyone's genuine passion for the iconic ocean liner, Söhnlein told BI in an interview that the Titanic "holds no interest for me whatsoever."

"One of the reasons I talked with Stockton all the time in the recent years is he would always call me before the expedition to see if I wanted to come to the Titanic," he said.

"And honestly, I never had any desire to go to the Titanic. I just don't see the appeal of it," Söhnlein said, "For me, personally, I think a big part of that is because I prefer exploration. And the Titanic has already been visited, it's been documented, its been filmed. James Cameron has done a phenomenal job on it."

Brine pools and unexplored blue holes

Stanley and Söhnlein said they're less interested in shipwreck sites overall and more keen on exploring the ocean's ecosystem.

"Hot sea vents, brine pools, and deep-water coral reefs would all be more interesting than a shipwreck and can be accessed by going 2,000-5,000 feet, not the 13,000 feet it takes to get to the Titanic," Stanley said.

Similarly, Söhnlein is interested in deep trenches and hydrothermal vents — something Rush was also passionate about, he said.

Söhnlein explained that they're "almost completely unexplored," "play key roles in our planetary dynamics," and "they likely hold thousands of undiscovered and unknown life forms."

Söhnlein's company, Blue Marble Exploration, recently announced it would venture into Dean's Blue Hole, a site in the Bahamas about 660 feet from the surface.

"Dean's Blue Hole is an enigma for geologists studying underwater caverns," Blue Marble Exploration's website says. "It is the largest of its kind in the world, and yet very little is known about it, including how it formed more than 15,000 years ago."

The company adds that it expects to find "human remains" of people who drowned in the blue hole "due to a variety of misfortunes."

It's unclear how many people died at the site. The most notable case occurred in 2013 when American freediver Nicholas Mevoli attempted to break a freediving record by reaching 72 meters in a single breath, The New York Times reported. Mevoli surfaced but died shortly after.