• Nearly five inches of snow fell at JFK Airport on Sunday.
• Passengers were left waiting on the tarmac for hours after landing.
• As congestion built up, Delta flights into JFK were temporarily stopped from taking off.

A snowstorm left passengers waiting for hours on the tarmac at New York's JFK Airport on Sunday.

The National Weather Service said that 4.6 inches of snow had fallen in the area by 1 p.m., some two inches more than at Newark and LaGuardia. Temperatures dropped into the low teens overnight.

Data from Flightradar24 showed how incoming planes had lengthy delays before being able to park at their airport gates.

Delta Air Lines Flight 5052, from Charlotte, was nearly three hours behind schedule when it touched down at JFK.

It then took another three and a half hours before it reached the gate.

American Airlines passengers from Miami also had to be patient. They departed two hours late, then circled twice on approach to JFK, before spending over an hour taxiing, per Flightradar24.

Air traffic control advisories show how the airport's arrival rate was dramatically slowed so that snow and ice could be removed.

One advisory at around 10 a.m. said that the ground delay program could see average delays of over three hours, and some people being nearly five hours behind schedule.

As congestion built up, Delta flights to JFK were temporarily stopped from taking off.

"Winter weather conditions impacting taxiways at JFK contributed to flight delays Sunday evening," Delta told Business Insider in a statement.

"Safety is always our top priority, and we appreciate our customers' patience during this period and apologize for the delay in their travels."

Data from FlightAware showed that over 1,400 flights were delayed or canceled in the New York City area — including over 500 at JFK.

Over half of the flights at JFK and Newark were delayed, while about one-fifth were canceled. Meanwhile, 40% of flights were canceled at LaGuardia, according to FlightAware.

The Port Authority of New York and New Jersey, which operates JFK, Newark, and LaGuardia, did not immediately respond to a request for comment sent outside US working hours.

• I swiped on Raya for a month. I saw a handful of celebrities, but dozens of creative directors.
• It took me months to get accepted to Raya, even with a referral.
• I liked the app's design, and it was a nice test to filter out daters who weren't working professionals.

I always thought Raya was an exclusive club, saved for the most elite daters. Then I got accepted.

Raya is a members-only dating app. Daters must submit an application to get behind the app's golden gates, which includes linking your Instagram profile. Getting a recommendation from a current Raya member can be helpful.

I had all of that: the public Instagram, the referral from a friend, and a willingness to pay Raya's $24.99 monthly fee (or $49.99 for premium features).

It still took me months to get accepted.

The anticipation made Raya even more appealing, the elusive app that I was almost in, if only they reviewed my application. Maybe I'd meet a celebrity on there. Maybe I'd match and fall in love with one of the "Heated Rivalry" stars.

Then I got in — and I encountered hardly any celebrities.

I saw influencers. I saw interior designers. There was an endless parade of creative directors. But no famous people.

Maybe it's my fault for assuming it would be brimming with them. I grew up feasting on tabloids, later transitioning to the endless funnel of talk show clips and Pop Crave updates on X. I saw that Dakota Fanning and Nikki Glaser were on it. I heard that Andy Cohen signed up through John Mayer's referral.

At one point, I saw a solidly C-list actor. I gushed to a friend. Their response: "Oh, was he in 'American Horror Story?'" (He wasn't.)

I see TikToks all the time of women listing the A-list men they've swiped through on Raya. Maybe, I wondered, it's because I'm gay. But there weren't even many celebs in the big gay niches, from what I could see; I only spotted two Broadway actors.

Still, I kept swiping. Raya's main feed resembles Tinder, with left and right swipes determining matches. Raya users care less about bios, though; I found that most users didn't even write one. The most important elements of the profile were the daters' jobs, their Instagram, and their photos.

Requiring users to link an Instagram proved helpful, especially on a status-driven app. It was a good smell test: Is this person really a "director," or do they just direct their TikTok days-in-the-life? I could normally decode it from an Instagram profile.

My biggest frustration with Raya's swiping algorithm was its location policies. It often showed me people who were only briefly traveling to New York, or people who were out of state entirely. Maybe that'd be nice if I were one of Raya's wealthier customers, willing to book a plane ticket for the right guy. I can't afford a boyfriend in Los Angeles.

It didn't take long before I started matching — not with celebrities, but certainly with some successful people. I matched with a music video director and a ballet dancer. I spent some time messaging with a Big Tech engineer.

I'm being purposefully vague here, not giving names or companies. That's mostly my personal ethics, but also because Raya has a strict confidentiality policy.

At one point, I saw a friend's former flame on the app. Without thinking, I screenshotted the profile to text it to them. Raya scolded me. If I took another screenshot, it said, I would be booted.

Anyways, writing this story in the first place will likely get me kicked from Raya. Sorry!

Having spent the last two years reporting on dating apps, I've tried many of them. There are currently seven dating apps downloaded on my phone. (And I'm still single… maybe that's a sign.) Of them all, I thought Raya was pretty solid.

The UX was clean, the profile set-up was easy, and the users were fairly active. More than anything, it filtered the pool by status. The Raya application process felt more like a "no scrubs" test; it slimmed the pool down to users who had rich friends and were willing to pay the subscription fee.

How different is it, then, from other paid apps like The League? Not much. But the allure of being on Raya was strong, if only for something to brag about at cocktail parties.

Netflix's co-CEOs want staffers to be assured that its bid to acquire Warner Bros will be good for the company — and for jobs across Hollywood.

In a letter sent to staffers on Monday, a copy of which was also filed publicly with the Securities and Exchange Commission, Greg Peters and Ted Sarandos said a combined Netflix-Warner Bros is "pro-consumer, pro-innovation, pro-worker, pro-creator, and pro-growth."

"We see this as a win for the entertainment industry, not the end of it," the Netflix co-CEOs wrote, addressing concerns that the combo of the studio giant and one of the most iconic studios could bring about "the end of Hollywood."

Netflix earlier this month announced its intention to acquire Warner Bros. from Warner Bros Discovery for an equity value of $72 billion, including debt, which would be the biggest acquisition in the streamer's history.

Rival Paramount Skydance responded days later with a hostile bid to acquire all of WBD in a deal valued at around $108 billion.

Peters and Sarandos addressed the hostile bid in the letter, saying it was to be expected but that Netflix has a solid deal in place.

"It's great for our shareholders, great for consumers, and a strong way to create and protect jobs in the industry," they wrote.

This is a developing story, check back for updates.

Read the letter from Netflix co-CEOs Greg Peters and Ted Sarandos to staffers in full below:

OUR DEAL WITH WARNER BROS

By: Greg Peters and Ted Sarandos

As news around our deal with Warner Bros. continued this week, we wanted to keep you as informed as we can. Our position hasn't changed: we strongly believe that Netflix and Warner Bros. joining forces will offer consumers more choice and value, allow the creative community to reach even more audiences with our combined distribution, and fuel our long-term growth. We made this deal because their deep portfolio of iconic franchises, expansive library, and strong studio capabilities will complement—not duplicate—our existing business.

This is going to be a complex process over the next year or so and there's a lot we won't be able to share, but we did want to give you our thoughts on some of the most pressing questions we've heard since we connected last week.

How do we feel about Paramount's hostile bid? It was entirely expected. But, we have a solid deal in place. It's great for our shareholders, great for consumers, and a strong way to create and protect jobs in the industry. We're confident we'll get it over the finish line—and we're genuinely excited about what's ahead.

Are we confident regulators will approve? We believe in this deal—in the value it creates— and we're confident we'll get the approvals we need to make it happen. The fundamentals are clear: this deal is pro-consumer, pro-innovation, pro-worker, pro-creator, and pro-growth. Also, if you look at it through the lens of Nielsen data, even after combining with Warner Bros., our view share would only move from 8% to 9% in the US—still well behind YouTube (13%) and a potential Paramount/WBD combination (14%). We believe the facts speak for themselves, and we're fully prepared to put ourselves in a strong position for approval.

Will we preserve theatrical releases as part of WBD's distribution model? Yes—we're fully committed to releasing Warner Bros. movies in theaters, just as they do today. Theatrical is an important part of their business and legacy, and we don't want to change what makes Warner Bros. so valuable. If this deal had happened two years ago, hits like Minecraft and Superman would still have premiered on the big screen as they did—and that's how we plan to keep it. We haven't prioritized theatrical in the past because that wasn't our business at Netflix. When this deal closes, we will be in that business.

Some feel this is the end of Hollywood. What's our response to that? This is something that we've heard for a long time—including when we started the streaming business. Our stance then and now is the same—we see this as a win for the entertainment industry, not the end of it. This deal is about growth: Warner Bros. brings businesses and capabilities we don't have, so there's no overlap or studio closures. We're strengthening one of Hollywood's most iconic studios, supporting jobs, and ensuring a healthy future for film and TV production.

What's next? We've got a small but mighty team of experts working on this so the rest of us can stay focused on the big 2026 ambitions we've established for our business. We've got huge potential still ahead of us—even before we factor in Warner Bros.—so our focus should remain on realizing that potential based on our organic growth. We know that's easier said than done with all the headlines and speculation, but continuing to deliver for our members is the best thing we can focus on.

Where is the best place to follow along? As a reminder, Take 5 is for employees only. We've launched a public site as our source of truth for external audiences—which will be updated further—and it's a resource you can share with friends and family who might have their own questions. You can also listen to our UBS webcast from earlier this week.

-Greg and Ted

• SpaceX's satellite internet service, Starlink, is booming as it prepares for a reported $1.5 trillion IPO.
• Starlink internet traffic more than doubled in 2025, according to data from Cloudflare.
• Starlink has launched in a host of new countries this year and hit 8 million customers last month.

SpaceX is reportedly preparing for a monster IPO — and a booming Starlink is a big reason why.

Global web traffic from SpaceX's satellite-based internet service more than doubled in 2025, according to data from Cloudflare, a cybersecurity company that handles tens of millions of requests between users and websites every second.

It's the latest year of explosive traffic growth for Starlink, which uses a constellation of more than 9,000 low-orbit satellites to provide internet connection, including to remote areas.

SpaceX said in November that the service has 8 million active customers, up from 4 million in September 2024, and is now online in over 150 markets.

Around 23 airlines have also announced plans to use Starlink to offer high-speed WiFi on their planes, and SpaceX has signalled it could soon launch its own mobile carrier service powered by the satellite network.

Starlink's growth comes as reports suggest a colossal SpaceX public listing is on the cards. Elon Musk seemed to confirm on Wednesday that the rocket maker is considering an IPO as early as next year, which multiple outlets have reported could see SpaceX valued at around $1.5 trillion.

That would catapult SpaceX into the list of the world's most valuable companies, and potentially put Musk within touching distance of becoming the first-ever trillionaire.

Since its founding by Musk in 2002, SpaceX has successfully commercialized reusable rockets, a feat previously thought impossible by many within the space industry, and now launches more cargo into orbit than any other company.

In the long term, SpaceX aims to fulfill its billionaire founder's ambitious visions of colonizing Mars and putting data centers in space with its giant Starship rocket.

For now, however, the Texas-based company's huge valuation is driven by the success of Starlink, with Musk saying this month that the satellite network was "by far" the largest driver of SpaceX's revenue.

Cloudflare's annual report found that in the more than 20 countries and regions where Starlink launched in 2025, internet traffic from its satellite service surged immediately after the service became available. Cloudflare said that internet traffic grew 295% in Botswana this year, with Starlink launching in the African country in August 2024.

There's no sign of Starlink slowing down, with SpaceX preparing to launch the service in India next year.

There's also little sign of major competition. Rival services, including Amazon's Leo and China's Spacesail, are attempting to build their own constellations, but they have launched fewer satellites than Starlink.

• The Rockefeller tree has been put up every season around Christmas since the 1930s.
• Each year, a tree is selected and driven across state lines to Manhattan's Rockefeller Center.
• The iconic tree has come from Canada, New York, and various states across the Northeast.

Few holiday traditions are as enduring — or as photographed — as the Rockefeller Center Christmas tree.

Since the 1930s, a towering tree has appeared in Midtown Manhattan each winter, drawing crowds from around the world and signaling the unofficial start of the holiday season.

But long before it's lit in front of millions, each Rockefeller tree begins its journey elsewhere, sometimes traveling hundreds of miles to reach its famous perch above Rockefeller Center's skating rink.

Practically every tree since the tradition's inception has been a Norway spruce, though there have been a couple of white spruces and balsam firs over the years.

The tree is selected from candidates across the country, either through people submitting photos of their own trees or through the Rockefeller Center head gardener scouting potential picks in person.

Here's where the Rockefeller tree has come from over the past 100 years — see if your hometown has ever supplied the iconic tree.

1930s: Babylon, New York

Height (1934): 70 feet

1940s: Long Island, New York

Height (1944): 65 feet

1950s: Belvidere, New Jersey

Height (1955): 65 feet

1960s: Ottawa, Ontario, Canada

Height (1966): 64 feet

1970s: East Montpelier, Vermont

Height (1971): 65 feet

1980: Mahwah, New Jersey

Height: 70 feet

1981: West Danville, Vermont

Height: 65 feet

1982: Mahwah, New Jersey

Height: 70 feet

1983: Valley Cottage, New York

Height: 75 feet

1984: Far Hills, New Jersey

Height: 75 feet

1985: Harveyville, Pennsylvania

Height: 75 feet

1986: Nanuet, New York

Height: 68 feet

1987: Suffern, New York

Height: 75 feet

1988: Raritan Township, New Jersey

Height: 75 feet

1989: Montebello, New York

Height: 70 feet

1990: West Norwalk, Connecticut

Height: 75 feet

1991: Suffern, New York

Height: 65 feet

1992: Stony Point, New York

Height: 65 feet

1993: Nanuet, New York

Height: 85 feet

1994: Ridgefield, Connecticut

Height: 85 feet

1995: Mendham Borough, New Jersey

Height: 75 feet

1996: Armonk, New York

Height: 90 feet

1997: Stony Point, New York

Height: 70 feet

1998: Richfield, Ohio

Height: 75 feet

1999: Killingworth, Connecticut

Height: 100 feet

2000: Buchanan, New York

Height: 80 feet

2001: Wayne, New Jersey

Height: 81 feet

2002: Bloomsbury, New Jersey

Height: 76 feet

2003: Manchester, Connecticut

Height: 79 feet

2004: Suffern, New York

Height: 71 feet

2005: Wayne, New Jersey

Height: 74 feet

2006: Ridgefield, Connecticut

Height: 88 feet

2007: Shelton, Connecticut

Height: 84 feet

2008: Hamilton Township, New Jersey

Height: 72 feet

2009: Easton, Connecticut

Height: 76 feet

2010: Mahopac, New York

Height: 74 feet

2011: Mifflinville, Pennsylvania

Height: 74 feet

2012: Flanders, New Jersey

Height: 80 feet

2013: Shelton, Connecticut

Height: 76 feet

2014: Danville, Pennsylvania

Height: 85 feet

2015: Gardiner, New York

Height: 78 feet

2016: Oneonta, New York

Height: 94 feet

2017: State College, Pennsylvania

Height: 75 feet

2018: Wallkill, New York

Height: 72 feet

2019: Florida, New York

Height: 77 feet

2020: Oneonta, New York

Height: 75 feet

2021: Elkton, Maryland

Height: 79 feet

2022: Queensbury, New York

Height: 82 feet

2023: Vestal, New York

Height: 80 feet

2024: West Stockbridge, Massachusetts

Height: 74 feet

2025: East Greenbush, New York

Height: 75 feet

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

Don't say bah humbug to applying to jobs during the holiday season.

It's easy to feel like a Scrooge about the job market these days. At this point, you might think you'll need a Christmas miracle to get hired in the waning moments of 2025.

But unlike Santa Claus, your chances of getting hired in December are real, writes BI's Sarah E. Needleman.

I don't mean to be a Grinch by telling you to spend your holidays applying for jobs. I get the feeling of wanting to shut it down for the year and give it a go in 2026. After all, it's been a brutal year for job seekers.

But recruiters and hiring managers told Sarah they're not slowing down, so neither should you. In some cases, they need to rush through hirings or risk losing any remaining budget for the year.

Also, what's the alternative? Wait until the New Year? That just means even more competition as people reevaluate their jobs after bonus season. There's also the risk of another wave of layoffs to kick off the new year, which will increase the candidate pool.

So set aside the eggnog for a bit and keep plugging away on those applications. Take it from me, it can happen.

My Business Insider work anniversary? December 10.

Job hunting isn't the only thing you shouldn't hold off on until the New Year.

At the risk of sounding like a cringey LinkedIn influencer, the best time to do something is yesterday; the second-best time is now.

Here are three other things you can check off your to-do list before midnight on December 31:

A new home for the holidays. The holidays can be a great time to go home shopping. In fact, according to one real-estate investor and agent, you could get a better deal. A few days before Christmas is her favorite time to submit an offer because the seller could be distracted or keen to wrap things up before year's end.

Invest then rest. If you're investing for the long haul — which, let's be honest, is the only way you should be investing — the end of the year could be a good time to dive in. Certain investment vehicles, like IRAs, have limits on yearly contributions, meaning you can load up before starting fresh next month.

Silver (dumb)bells. Gyms in January are a mess. Front-run the New Year's resolution crowd and start getting your workouts in now. The last few weeks of December are my favorite: It's mostly empty, and the people there are the gym rats who are always the friendliest. Get a lay of the land before people start doing curls in the squat rack on January 2.

• A JetBlue plane had a close call with a US Air Force plane near Venezuela on Friday.
• The pilot told air traffic controllers he nearly had a midair collision, a recording shows.
• "They don't have their transponder on," he said. "It's outrageous."

A JetBlue pilot said he nearly had a midair collision with a US Air Force plane on Friday.

Flight 1112 was flying from Curaçao to New York. The island country, which is part of the Netherlands, is about 40 miles off the coast of Venezuela.

About 20 minutes after takeoff, the JetBlue pilot contacted Curaçao's air traffic control center.

"We just had traffic pass directly in front of us, within 5 miles, maybe 2 or 3 miles," he said in a recording published by LiveATC.net. He added that it was an Air Force air-to-air refueller.

The JetBlue Airbus A320 was also only about 600 feet below the military aircraft. The pilot said the latter was at 34,000 feet while the JetBlue plane was passing through 33,400 feet and ascending to 35,000 feet.

"So we had to stop our climb and actually just descend to avoid hitting them," the pilot said.

While the distance between the two aircraft gave the plane enough time to maneuver, the pilot was evidently shocked.

"They don't have their transponder on," he said. "It's outrageous."

"I don't have anything on my scope," the controller replied. "You are totally right, sir."

The pilot then asked the controller to make a note of it, adding: "We almost had a midair collision up here."

Transponders are a vital piece of aircraft equipment, as they send signals to air traffic control centers and to other nearby planes.

The Traffic Alert and Collision Avoidance System, or TCAS, relies on active nearby transponders to warn both aircraft and, if necessary, provide instructions for them to avoid each other.

However, military aircraft may turn off their transponders to remain undetected during sensitive missions.

The US military has launched air strikes against suspected drug traffickers in the Caribbean Sea amid escalating tensions with Venezuela. It has also deployed thousands of troops and the USS Gerald R. Ford, the world's largest aircraft carrier.

On November 21, a Notice to Airmen (NOTAM) was put in place until the end of December, warning pilots to "exercise extreme caution" around Curaçao due to the "presence of non-identified aircraft operations."

Later in November, President Donald Trump posted on Truth Social, saying that pilots should consider the airspace around Venezuela "to be closed in its entirety."

US Southern Command, which is responsible for military operations in the area, said in a statement shared with Business Insider: "We are aware of the recent reporting regarding US military aircraft operations in the Caribbean and are currently reviewing the matter."

"Military aircrews are highly trained professionals who operate in accordance with established procedures and applicable airspace requirements," it added. "Safety remains a top priority, and we are working through the appropriate channels to assess the facts surrounding the situation."

JetBlue didn't immediately respond to a request for comment sent by Business Insider outside US working hours.

• New technology is changing the decades-old maintenance work on Air Force refueling aircraft.
• Companies MetroStar and ActionStreamer worked with Air Force technicians to develop IRIS.
• IRIS includes AI-enabled workflow and a live-feed video and audio setup, and it's already speeding up work.

Inside some of the Air Force's oldest refueling aircraft, technicians are crawling through tight, dirty spaces, painstakingly cleaning sealant on fuel tanks and tightening loose rivets.

They climb into the dark, cramped tanks with little more than a flashlight, some tools, and shaky comms. It can be hard to breathe, the air smells like jet fuel, the fixes aren't always clear, and the punishing work can be dangerous if done wrong.

It's a job that hasn't changed much in over 50 years, but new gear, including a live-feed video headset and artificial intelligence-enabled technology, is finally bringing it into the 21st century.

The Integrated Respirator Information System, known as IRIS and developed by MetroStar and ActionStreamer, is speeding up the maintenance process, company officials and Air Force technicians say, and making it safer and more efficient.

Tankers are important logistics assets, what the Air Force calls "silent enablers," that support missions by helping keep fighters and bombers airborne for longer than the onboard fuel tanks can sustain alone. For instance, Operation Midnight Hammer, which saw US stealth bombers strike Iran's nuclear site this year, involved dozens of refueling tankers supporting the strike package.

Although fighter aircraft like the F-35 Lightning II Joint Strike Fighter or bombers like the B-2 Spirit get the most attention, tankers like the KC-135 Stratotanker are critical to US and allied airpower. For them to be useful, though, they have to be well-maintained.

IRIS began as an idea from two maintainers who noticed the broader potential of ActionStreamer's live-streaming tech — gear originally built for athletes to capture first-person views during games. The Air Force technicians pursued the concept for years, even as they rotated through new assignments and bases.

The Air Force had long believed that tools like this could be a major boost for maintainers. There were early forays into video tech in the 2000s, but the "technology wasn't quite there," Master Sgt. Troy French, a former 100th Maintenance Squadron member, told Business Insider. "An initial phase of this was kind of set up and abandoned because cameras weren't small enough."

Now, though, Air Force maintainers based at Royal Air Force Mildenhall, a central refueling base for the US missions in Europe, Africa, and the Middle East, have been testing out IRIS.

"They were, to be honest with you, a little apprehensive to start with," ActionStreamer CEO Bob Lento said, noting it was the first significant change to how technicians have done their jobs in years. But by the end of the first week, attitudes had flipped. "We were taking the cart out of the hangar into a safe area to do some software punch-ups, and they were like, 'Wait a minute, where are you going with that? We need to use that now.'"

A hard, multi-step, high-risk job

On a tanker aircraft like the KC-135, there's a hole just big enough for a person to fit through under the wing. It's the access point for the fuel tanks. "You crawl up there and you contort your body to be able to lie down flat and then put your feet in," French said. Inside, it is a tight space with lots of bumps and edges.

The workers wear heavy protective suits to guard against fuel exposure and keep sweat out of the tanks. They carry a flashlight and breathe through respirators that feed fresh air in from a hose running outside the aircraft.

Outside the aircraft, a support team stands by. One person runs tools to the person inside the tank while another monitors for any hazards or issues.

"If you need something, sometimes you just have to peel the respirator back, like, 'Hey, I need this extra wrench that I forgot,'" French said.

The runner will grab it and bring it to the entry point, screaming into the tank or pulling on the respirator hose to get the technician's attention. "If you're really deep in the tank, then you have to crawl back to get it from them, and you have to wait there for them to bring it, reducing the amount of time you're actually working."

Before a worker enters the aircraft, they'll know what issues they're looking for. A broken rivet, for instance, along with regular fuel tanker maintenance to keep the aircraft operating. But sometimes they adjust a different part in the wrong area of the refueling aircraft or leave a tool inside the tanker.

There's a lot of double-checking the work. Steps like removing sealant, cleaning, and putting adhesion in the tank require approval from other team members. It's inherently an hourslong job made even longer by wait times and communication lags.

And that's if it all runs smoothly. Sometimes, technicians make mistakes, extending the time. "A simple sealant job can turn from a couple of hours of scraping and then eventually reapplying to another day because it turned out that you applied it to the wrong spot," Tech Sgt. Chris Anderson, with the 100th Air Refueling Wing, said. "The way that we did things left a lot of room for error."

A logical fix, Frank said, was something wearable: "a camera with two-way audio would be awesome, and if it had lights, that'd be a second bonus."

A new way of doing an old job

The IRIS technology sits on top of the face mask tanker maintenance workers wear. It features a high-definition video camera, a two-way comms system that goes inside the mask, and a hands-free light. IRIS shows everything the technician is looking at to those outside the fuel tank and allows them to communicate with their team.

It connects to a mobile workstation outside the aircraft. On the cart, which can host up to four IRIS units simultaneously, the support team can see what the technician sees, talk them through the work, and record the footage.

Video records help verify what each shift completed and resolve disputes quickly. For instance, Anderson said that the day shift had cleared a fuel puddle, but the next shift found one and questioned the work. IRIS showed that the first team had done the job, revealing, as French said, " another problem, something's leaking." That prevented unnecessary rework and let them fix the issue.

In the past, a tricky aircraft issue could halt work while the right Air Force experts traveled in to assess it. Now, IRIS can send video to them instantly or launch a group call so everyone can see exactly what the technician sees.

Developers also see AI playing a growing role in streamlining the job. As a technician uses IRIS, an AI agent compiles images and data to make requests, anticipate needed work, and handle forms. That frees technicians from what retired Air Force Maj. Gen. Cedric George called "shallow work," so when their shift ends, "all he or she has to do is button up, clean up, go home."

IRIS is currently in use only at Mildenhall, but early results are promising, as the Air Force considers expanding it to other bases. Technicians using the system haven't had any safety incidents, and inspections are running 60% faster in test environments, according to pilot evaluations and internal logs. Based on KC-135 maintenance baselines, MetroStar estimates IRIS could save 35,000 maintainer hours and add more than 7,000 aircraft availability days.

George attributed the success of IRIS to the technicians who wanted to revamp the decades-old process to make it better for future workers. "This is not for the faint of heart, it's dirty work," he said, saying current technicians who worked on IRIS believe future maintainers "have to have something better than what we have now."

• David Chung is a serial entrepreneur and CEO of multiple beauty brands.
• Farmacy Beauty, which he founded in 2015, was acquired by Procter & Gamble for $350 million.
• He isn't driven by money, and at 66, he can't envision retiring, he says.

This as-told-to essay is based on a conversation with David Chung, owner and chairman of Amare Global. It has been edited for length and clarity.

I couldn't believe there was a banana just sitting on the kitchen table. In Korea, having a banana was a big deal, but when I immigrated to New York City at 12, we had fruit and even M&Ms. Everything was so luxurious.

My mother immigrated to the US in 1963 with less than $100. When she arrived in New York, she started a small, mom-and-pop gift shop. She grew the business through and eventually got her green card. I joined her about eight years later, in the middle of a New York winter. I didn't speak the language, but I felt lucky to be in the US.

I decided to get into cosmetics after watching my mom's business

My mother continued to grow her store, expanding into a drugstore and pharmacy. By the early 2000s, she had a business worth tens of millions.

She was very, very entrepreneurial. Watching her journey inspired me and has carried over even today. I have a lot of her DNA when it comes to business. Now that I'm 66, I'll think, "I'm just like my mother!" It's scary.

My mom's business set the stage for mine. Working in her shop, I saw that beauty products provided a great business opportunity. The products are small, which reduces warehousing and shipping costs. They're consumable, so customers return again and again. And even if the economy is bad, people don't give up on their skin.

I started my first business at 23

I went to college, but I found it difficult to concentrate because I was always thinking about starting my business. Even today, I don't drive much because I get so distracted thinking about running my companies (instead, I use a driver). Eventually, I graduated with a degree in engineering.

Right next to my school, there was a small video rental store. These were the days before Blockbuster. I bought that store when I was 23, and expanded it slowly to sell gifts and cosmetics.

That was my start in business. Other than my mom, I've never worked for anyone else. That meant I had to learn hard lessons about business structure, processes, and systems on my own.

I have more money than I could ever spend, but still love building businesses

Over time, I pivoted from retail to research, design, and manufacturing. In 2018, I sold my shares in one company for $53.7 million. In 2021, I sold my company, Farmacy Beauty, for hundreds of millions (I'm not allowed to share the specific amount). I remember being at my computer on December 31st, watching the funds being deposited into my account. I didn't feel anything. I didn't think "I'm rich now." I didn't even go out to dinner to celebrate.

Entrepreneurship has never been about money for me. It's more about the accomplishment and excitement of building something. I remember the first time I was in a room with people who had more credentials than me. I came up with an idea they hadn't considered. That's the first time I realized that I had a different way of thinking about things.

I have a huge amount of money now — I could never spend it all. And yet, when those funds hit my account, I didn't buy a Rolex or a fancy car. I went out and bought another company to run.

I want to build wealth in order to give back

Recently, I told an employee that I'm going to retire in three years. She laughed and said I told her the same thing 15 years ago.

I don't think I will ever retire fully. God has given me a talent for being business-minded and good at what I'm doing. I want to utilize that as long as I'm able to.

My mother was very passionate about giving back, particularly to the Korean American community. I figure the more money I make, the more I can give back. So, why not use this skill?

• Clory Jackson and her husband pay $20,000 a year on childcare for their two small children.
• Jackson juggles two jobs, budgets, and cuts down on her lifestyle to afford childcare.
• She says the sacrifices and costs are worth it for her kids to receive full-time care.

This as-told-to essay is based on a conversation with Clory Jackson, a 41-year-old VP in insurance technology, community organizer, and founder of The Brownsville Project, who lives in Brooklyn with her husband and two young children. It has been edited for length and clarity.

I knew before having children that raising a child was expensive, but I didn't fully understand the monthly cost of childcare.

I juggle two remote jobs, as a VP at an insurance-tech company and founder of a nonprofit, while my husband works as a principal. Our 4-year-old daughter and 2-year-old son are in kindergarten and day care, and we pay $380 a week for full time day care and afterschool care in NYC. That's a little under $20,000 a year on childcare alone.

We've had to make lifestyle changes to manage our costs, but it's worth it for my kids to receive the care and education they need.

I can't provide the care my son needs while working from home

After dropping my husband and kids off at work, school, and day care, I make my way home and work from 9 a.m. to 5 p.m. We were fortunate that my son's day care picks my daughter up and watches her after school, so I don't have to pick the kids up until 6 p.m"

Since I work from home and take calls all day, I can't provide the care and education my son needs. I don't want a TV babysitting him all day. He needs active engagement from educators, socialization, time outside, and a routine. I wouldn't be able to fulfill my duties at work, prepare meals, change diapers, and care for him if he stayed at home instead of daycare.

When we get home, we eat, then my husband and I try our best to wrangle the kids into taking a bath, brushing their teeth, and getting to bed. I'll maybe sneak some more work in before getting to bed by 10 p.m. or 11 p.m.

We're lucky to only pay $380 a week for daycare

Our last daycare had a beautiful center with a pedagogy for students, progress reports for infants, and three video updates a day through an app, but we couldn't sustain the cost when I unexpectedly became pregnant with our youngest.

We had just closed on a fixer-upper condo and were in a tight spot. After looking around for options, we found an in-home daycare that was within our budget.

Still, some weeks we couldn't afford the payment, and they've been forgiving and understanding. They've given us gentle reminders or waived it entirely when we were going through a rough patch, like when we had a death in the family.

Our current at-home daycare is less luxurious, but we know our kids are safe and loved, and that's all that matters.

I've made several life changes to manage the cost

While our condo was under renovation, we moved back in with my parents briefly, who live in Maryland, and I had our youngest at WVU Hospital, which was much cheaper than giving birth in New York.

Both my kids used cloth diapers to save a couple of hundred dollars on even the cheapest diapers at Costco. We also shop at discount and bin stores to save money on clothes. I've bargain shopped for pleasure, but now it's out of necessity.

I've also switched up my hair routine to braids instead of my natural hair. I spend less on products and wash my hair once a month, as it requires less frequent upkeep than natural hair care. The self-care standards for me, as a single person, versus me now, married with kids, have undergone a steep decline.

I'm working to provide for my family

In my opinion, childcare is a necessity, even if it's still treated as a luxury by the working world. Every child deserves a good education, and what raising kids has shown me is that you get what you pay for.

I work and try to climb a career ladder because I want to provide for my family. I love my children and husband, and we need to afford and invest in their future. One of those investments right now is childcare.