• A $35 million settlement fund will be established due to a class action lawsuit against Apple.
• The 2019 lawsuit said iPhone 7 and iPhone 7 Plus had audio issues, which Apple denied.
• Some iPhone customers can receive up to $349.

Apple reached a $35 million settlement with iPhone 7 and iPhone 7 Plus users who said their phones had audio problems. That means if you had one of those phones, you could get paid.

The lawsuit — available on the Settlement Administrator website — was first filed in 2019. It argues the iPhone 7 and iPhone 7 Plus had audio issues related to the "audio IC chip." The plaintiffs also accused Apple of violating consumer protection laws and breach of warranty.

Apple denied the phones had audio issues or that the company did anything wrong. Representatives for Apple did not respond to a request for comment from Business Insider.

Nonetheless, Apple settled the case. Now attorneys for the plaintiffs said affected iPhone users could get up to $349.

"We are proud of the nationwide class action Settlement that is pending final approval before the Court, which if approved will provide Settlement Class Members who complained to Apple about the alleged audio defect up to $349 in monetary relief," attorneys Andrea Gold and Greg Coleman said in a statement.

Here's what iPhone customers need to know.

Who qualifies?

Apple customers in the United States who owned those phone models between September 2016 and January 2023 might be eligible to receive payment for the settlement.

The settlement administrator says customers must have reported the covered audio issues to Apple, including those who paid "out of pocket" for repairs and replacements related to the covered audio issues.

How much money could iPhone customers receive?

iPhone customers who paid Apple "out of pocket" for replacements and repairs related to the audio issue will receive "an equal payment of at least $50 and no more than $349."

Those who reported the audio issues to Apple but did not pay for repairs or replacements will receive "an equal payment of up to $125."

The $35 million settlement fund will be formally established if a judge grants approval during a hearing on July 18.

When is the deadline to apply?

The original deadline for customers who wanted to be included in the settlement was June 3, but the court approved an extension.

The new deadline is July 3, 2024.

Interested customers must provide the settlement administrator with payment information and their preferred payment method. This can be done via an online form or mailing it to the Tabak v. Apple Class Action Administrators.

Some customers included in the settlement may receive a postcard notification or email about the lawsuit.

If customers don't select a payment method and provide payment information, they'll remain in the settlement class but cannot receive payment. They will also waive their rights to sue Apple for the aforementioned issues in the future.

• Joe Biden's debate performance disappointed Democrats, and even he knows it.
• Voters have worried about Biden's age, which showed during the debate.
• Despite his age, simply slowing down and saying less would have helped, a speech coach told BI.

Even President Joe Biden knows his debate performance was off.

Voters and legislators have long been worried about Biden's age, nervous that he's slowing down and spitballing about replacement candidates because of it.

But slowing down and saying less might have actually helped him perform better during Thursday's debate, Carmie McCook, a DC-based public speaking coach, told Business Insider.

"Less is always better. Always. The more you throw out there, the more landmines you've got to step on. Stay focused," McCook said. "His team has to know if he has issues staying on target, you just drill, go back to the message… Don't let the other person sit in the driver's seat and dictate what you're going to say."

Viewers seemed to agree that former President Donald Trump won the debate, even though he also didn't articulate himself very well. Both candidates are hoping voters look past their obvious flaws.

McCook said Biden also takes time to express his thoughts in speech, due to his lifelong stutter, which didn't help his optics.

"I'm sure he was tired because they probably were drilling him, and he probably didn't feel well," McCook said. "He stutters, and I work with a lot of people with that same issue. I do know it takes time sometimes for you to formulate your word, and it does look like you're lost in thought because you're trying to figure out, 'Which tongue muscles can I use? Or what alternative word can I use?'"

Max Burns, a Democratic strategist, said on X that Biden needs to get out to rallies to "push back against the stiff and meandering image he portrayed on Thursday."

"Biden needs better (and frankly, less) prep in the future. He was clearly bogged down trying to recite long lists of data points instead of engaging more organically, like he did in 2020. That can be worked on, but it needs to start now," Burns posted on X.

McCook made similar points.

"Slow down," she said. "Take your time. Do not let the other person rattle you because that's what they're there to do. Stick to your top three to five points, and that is it."

• Celebrity real-estate broker Ryan Serhant has appeared on reality shows for a decade.
• A new Netflix show tracks Serhant and his colleagues as they negotiate deals for wealthy clients.  
• Beyond stunning homes, Serhant said he wants to showcase some hard parts of the brokerage business.

In 2012, Instagram didn't have video, the housing market was cautiously celebrating signs of recovery from the crash of 2008, and Ryan Serhant made his debut on Bravo's reality television show, "Million Dollar Listing New York."

On the show, one of the early real-estate reality series of its kind, viewers followed Serhant and other agents behind the gilded doors of elite New York City real estate, like a $17 million three-story Greenwich Village townhouse or $18.5 million SoHo loft.

Serhant's new show, "Owning Manhattan," which premieres June 28 on Netflix, is the newest addition to the collection.

Serhant explained that during the "Million Dollar Listing" days, there was a "voyeuristic" element for viewers who wanted to pull back the curtain to see the city's historic brownstones or jaw-dropping penthouses for themselves.

"We were showing people what they had never seen before," Serhant, 39, told Business Insider. "It was the lifestyles of the rich and the famous."

Now, though, it's never been easier to get peeks into rarefied real estate, with the proliferation of reality TV shows that hawk luxury digs, the rise of agents posting photos and videos on social media, and Zillow-stalking as a hobby.

If "The Real World" was "Reality TV 1.0" and shows like "Million Dollar Listing" were "2.0," Serhant explained, he's ready to usher in "Reality TV 3.0" with his new Netflix series, which has what he believes is a new angle to lure viewers away from their phones and keep them hooked.

"The real estate isn't what's exclusive anymore," Serhant explained. Instead, the draw is "the lives of the people who work in this business."

Those lives — his own and the other agents he hired to work at the brokerage he founded in 2020 after leaving established firm Nest Seekers — will be fully on display in the eight-episode season "Owning Manhattan," premiering June 28 on Netflix.

The show takes viewers on a journey of the ups and downs of building a career in the cutthroat environment of New York City real estate, like Chloe Tucker Caine, who recently transitioned from Broadway to broker, and Tricia Lee, who's ready to expand her dominance in Brooklyn and take over Manhattan.

"I did not want this to be a glamorized show," Serhant said. "New York City will make you and also break you."

Serhant passed down wisdom to new agents

With four reality shows and a decade of television under his belt, Serhant is well-positioned to coach the newcomers or the agents reporting to him who round out the cast.

When Netflix scouted the original cast, Serhant gathered them together and told them to take a full weekend to consider the decision. He told them to be ready to reveal vulnerable moments on camera and open up about the full journey with viewers, even the days they'd rather not share. Serhant cautioned them not to join if they just wanted to "get famous and sell toasters."

"This isn't years ago, the audience can smell out bullshit like this," he said.

A few agents actually ended up not doing the show, but 12 brave brokers said yes.

Serhant also had to test his own vulnerability on the show.

"I had never been a CEO on camera before," he said.

Challenges like losing a top agent to a rival firm or having to fire an employee for breaking company rules, all while managing clients and sales like the more junior agents, were difficult to deal with while being filmed, Serhant said.

But he said it's important to be frank with the audience.

"The show is going to be great if it's the most vulnerable real estate show on the planet and the most authentic," he told BI.

Television tugs at viewers' heartstrings — which can bring in new clients

With over 2 million followers on Instagram, 1.3 million followers on YouTube, and 806,000 followers on TikTok, Serhant already has a platform to share peeks into his daily life and business philosophy.

Still, he said, nothing compares with the power of television.

On any given day, Serhant could be ecstatic in person about selling Mercedes-Benz-branded residences in Miami or showing off new luxury condos in New York City.

However, he observed that clients are routinely more enchanted by the personal glimpses they see on television.

"All anyone else cared about was, 'Hey, we'd love to work with you. We watched your wedding in Greece.' Or 'Hey, we'd love to sell our entire building with you. My wife also went through IVF,'" he told BI.

In the first episode of "Owning Manhattan," Serhant said he wants his eponymous firm, just four years old, to be the No. 1 brokerage in New York City.

He knows the eyeballs — and clients — his new show will bring in.

"Our business is international," he told BI. "Netflix is the largest global distribution network on the planet."

• Companies are turning to consulting firms to help work out how to use AI effectively.
• Their clients are asking about how machine learning and generative AI can transform businesses.
• Consultants told BI that questions also include how to make AI worth the investment.

It's possible to pose almost any question to artificial intelligence.

But when it comes to how to use the technology, many companies are directing their inquiries to consulting firms instead.

Doling out advice on AI is making up a growing share of many firms' work. Some 900 of PwC's top 1,000 consulting clients are now working with the firm on incorporating AI into their businesses, a spokesperson told Business Insider.

In 2023, McKinsey & Company brought in a record $16 billion in revenue, partly due to the generative AI boom. Almost 40% of the company's work now relates to AI. And much of that is now moving to GenAI, Ben Ellencweig, a senior partner who leads alliances, acquisitions, and partnerships globally for McKinsey's AI arm, QuantumBlack, told BI.

Boston Consulting Group, for its part, now generates a fifth of its revenue from AI, and much of that work involves advising clients on GenAI, a spokesperson told BI.

"18 months ago, the conversation was all about 'what is GenAI,'" Allison Bailey, the head of people and organization practice at BCG, told BI.  "Today it is, 'How do I actually drive value with AI and drive meaningful change in how we work?'"

Even as some companies focus on how AI might rewrite corporate playbooks, some businesses are asking consultants how to get started. The question could be as simple as where it's wisest to invest resources and training in AI.

Bailey said the "people topics" are critical to the equation. Businesses want to know how to mobilize their workers to embrace the technology.

Greg Sward, head of strategy for technology, media, and telecommunications at KPMG US, said some corporate tech leaders wonder whether they have the knowledge to make smart decisions.

"Many CIOs are afraid that they don't have the right skills," he told BI. They're also worried about how to keep a handle on the technology and what the regulatory environment might look like.

BI asked several consultancies to share the most common questions they're getting about AI and their best advice. Here are some of the themes they identified.

Where to begin

Many companies are still determining how they might use AI and GenAI, according to several consultants.

Jim Rowan, AI market activation leader and principal of Deloitte Consulting, told BI that companies that are new to AI should start by asking some basic questions:

• What are we trying to achieve by adopting AI?
• Do we have the talent, investment, and systems to support deployment?
• Have we addressed data governance, privacy questions, potential biases, and other concerns?

If a company can answer those questions, it should outline areas where the technology will be helpful. Then, "closely measure and monitor its performance to make sure you're actually meeting your goals," Rowan added.

According to Vlad Lukic, global leader for BCG's tech & digital advantage practice, companies should also have a good handle on their data. That's the crucial base for training GenAI. "The first step is making sure you have your house in order from a data perspective. This enables greater seamlessness down the line, and that is where the magic lies," he told BI.

Roy Singh, global head of the advanced analytics practice at Bain & Company, told BI that those just getting started with AI should focus on short-term goals like understanding the technology or driving productivity gains.

Building workers' skills

Companies interested in AI know technology is often only part of the equation. Another component is ensuring that workers are up to speed.

Joe Atkinson, the chief products and technology officer at PwC, told BI that it's essential to help employees learn how to use generative AI rather than relying solely on recruiting AI specialists, who are in high demand.

Getting workers to use the tools might not be as hard as it sounds. Atkinson said the technology is so accessible that almost anyone in a company could use it to create products or services or to be more efficient.

Leading by example is important. Senior managers should use AI to demonstrate how it can be useful, while employees should be given time to explore the tech themselves, according to Deloitte's Rowan.

"It's important to build excitement for AI adoption and communicate openly," he said. So, companies should host events like hackathons, encourage experimentation, and educate workers on how AI could make them more efficient in their jobs.

Reinventing your business

The advances in AI will affect some companies more than others.

And in industries where AI is already forcing a rewrite of business models, companies need to think comprehensively about how they can overhaul operations with generative AI.

Bain's Singh pointed to the grocery business. Companies like Instacart and Carrefour are looking to "invent the next-generation customer experience" using AI, he said, adding that they're not necessarily just looking for efficiency gains.

Most companies, regardless of how much they might have dabbled in AI, should be flexible enough to accommodate new developments, according to PwC's Atkinson.

He suggests that companies should build AI systems with an open architecture approach, which is a way of designing software that makes adding, upgrading, or swapping out elements easy.

A return on investment

Bain's Singh said companies often wonder what sort of productivity gains and other financial benefits they might expect from using AI.

Yet he's said companies are starting to see measurable gains — sometimes even huge improvements — from AI. This might be in areas like software engineering, finance, or human resources.

Singh said many companies — especially those loaded with knowledge workers doing desk jobs — can expect to notch productivity improvements of 15% to 20%. Sometimes, it's far higher. In businesses where AI can take over repetitive tasks, the boost to productivity can be upward of 50%, he said.

That doesn't mean each worker necessarily gets back half of their time. But if the time it takes to complete some work is cut in half, then someone working in marketing, financial services compliance, or a life sciences regulatory role might eventually get back the equivalent of a full day's work.

Singh said it might take a company two to three years to achieve major efficiency gains but that the opportunity is immense.

In most cases, he said, it's important to set expectations about how new AI is for many businesses.

"We should all have the humility to admit we're very early in the adoption cycle," Singh said.

Do you work for a consultancy? Business Insider would like to hear from you. Email Lakshmi Varanasi or Tim Paradis from a nonwork device at lvaranasi@businessinsider.com or tparadis@businessinsider.com to share your story or ask for one of our Signal numbers.

• The US has sent Israel at least 14,000 2,000-pound bombs since October 7, Reuters reported.
• The highly destructive MK-84 has been used to devastating effect in Israel's offensive in Gaza.
• US military aid to Israel has totaled $6.5 billion since the start of the war on Hamas, a US official has said.

The US has shipped at least 14,000 MK-84 2,000-pound bombs to Israel since the start of the war in Gaza in October, Reuters reported, citing two US officials briefed on an updated list of shipments.

The MK-84 is one of Israel's largest and most destructive bombs, and it has used them to devastating effect in its strikes on Gaza, which began following Hamas' October 7 attacks.

A New York Times investigation last year found that Israel had "routinely" used the bomb in zones it had declared safe for civilians during the first six weeks of the war.

The Joint Program Executive Office Armaments & Ammunition says the MK-84 bomb, which the US used extensively in the Gulf War from 1990-1991, has a blast and fragmentation mechanism and is ideally suited for strikes on "buildings, rail yards, and lines of communication."

The US previously paused one shipment of the bomb due to concerns over the impact it could have in densely populated areas in the Gaza Strip. Munitions experts say bombs of such size are rarely dropped by US forces in densely populated areas anymore, per The Times.

"The use of 2,000-pound bombs in an area as densely populated as Gaza means it will take decades for communities to recover," John Chappell, an advisor on legal and policy issues at the Center for Civilians in Conflict, previously told CNN.

US support for Israel

The US has also shipped 6,500 500-pound bombs, 3,000 Hellfire missiles, and other munitions to Israel since October 7, the two officials told Reuters.

Tom Karako, a weapons expert at the Center for Strategic and International Studies, told the agency that this clearly demonstrated "a substantial level of support from the United States for our Israeli allies."

He added that they were the kind of munitions that Israel would use against Hamas or in a potential battle with Hezbollah.

While the full extent of US weapons shipments to Israel remains unclear, a senior Biden administration official recently confirmed that the US has delivered $6.5 billion in security assistance since October 7.

With the Palestinian death toll now standing at more than 37,000, according to the Gaza health ministry, scrutiny of the Israel Defense Forces' (IDF) actions has mounted, with Biden pausing a shipment of bombs to Israel amid concerns they would be used in its Rafah offensive without a plan for the civilians there.

But Biden is yet to take any further action to condition military aid deliveries, and the latest Reuters report on shipment details suggests there has been little reduction in the amount being delivered to Israel.

Domestically, Biden's support for Israel has become a contentious issue, particularly among young voters.

Business Insider reported in May that Biden's reelection campaign was struggling to shore up support among those critical of his support for Israel.

Tensions have also been brewing between Israel and the US in spite of the continuing aid deliveries, with Biden recently saying that there was "every reason" for people to think Israeli Prime Minister Netanyahu was prolonging the war in Gaza to stay in power.

Business Insider contacted the IDF and the Pentagon for comment.

• We sent three reporters to Chili's to try every burger on the menu.
• The double-stacked burgers were a little too heavy for our tastes.
• But we were pleasantly surprised by Alex's Santa Fe Burger, the most creative burger on the menu.

Chili's is having a moment.

Following the viral smash of Chili's Triple Dipper and the release of its first new burger in three years, the Big Smasher, we decided to put the other burgers on Chili's menu to the test and see if the chain is worthy of all this attention.

When Business Insider visited the chain's headquarters in April, executives told us Chili's was leaning into advertising campaigns and new menu initiatives in order to improve brand awareness and traffic — a strategy that appears to be working.

In April, Kevin Hochman, the CEO of Brinker International, which owns Chili's, said in an earnings call that same-store sales rose 3.5% in the third quarter.

Hochman added that Chili's outperformed competitors in the casual dining industry on sales by over 7% and on traffic by nearly 4% during the third quarter, despite traffic being down overall.

The chain attributed the positive momentum to a return to television advertising, as well as the release of its new Big Smasher burger, a dupe for McDonald's Big Mac and the centerpiece of the chain's value-focused marketing initiative.

Burgers are a huge area of opportunity for casual-dining chains.

Restaurant Business reported that limited-service chains where burgers are a core menu item generated $110 billion in total sales in 2023, more than double the sales generated by limited-service chicken chains like Popeyes and Chick-fil-A.

While this data was limited to fast-food chains, the trend extends to casual-dining burger chains like Chili's and Applebee's. Chili's is also attempting to prove it has the best-value burger.

Executives at the chain previously told BI they are focusing on the Chili's "core four" menu items, which include burgers, fajitas, Chicken Crispers, and margaritas, in future initiatives, with an increased focus on value.

We've already tried the Big Smasher, but we wanted to see how the other burgers on Chili's menu fared in terms of taste and value. We only tried the full-sized burgers and ordered them as-is. The prices included below reflect how much the burgers cost including fries as a side.

Business Insider coordinated with Chili's Grill & Bar to organize this taste test at our local restaurant, but BI paid for the meal, and the chain had no influence on our ranking.

Here's every Chili's burger, ranked from worst to best.

Our least favorite burger was also the most decadent: the Bacon Rancher.

The Bacon Rancher burger cost $19.49, excluding tax, at our local Chili's in Glendale, New York.

The Bacon Rancher comes with two beef patties, six slices of bacon, ranch dressing, American cheese, sauteed onions, and pickles on a buttered brioche bun.

The bacon was arranged in a criss-cross design on the top of the burger patties and cheese. There were two slices of cheese on the burger patties, which were smashed and had a crispy texture.

This was the Mount Everest of Chili's burgers.

The ranch dressing worked well with the other ingredients in the burger and added a creamy, tangy flavor that offset the savoriness of the two burger patties and bacon.

However, we thought this burger bordered on too much meat. We couldn't clearly taste the bacon over the juicy, meaty flavor of the patties, and the moisture from the two burgers affected the texture of the bun, which struggled to hold its shape.

We also missed some of the fresher ingredients, like lettuce or tomato, that we enjoyed in the other burgers we tried.

Overall, this burger just wasn't to our personal taste.

We experienced similar issues with the Double Oldtimer, but liked the toppings better.

The Double Oldtimer with cheese cost $17.79, excluding tax, at our local Chili's in Glendale, New York.

The Double Oldtimer with cheese comes with two beef patties, cheddar cheese, pickles, lettuce, tomato, red onion, and mustard.

The burgers were stacked neatly on top of one another, with the toppings under the beef. We thought this was interesting — we usually place burger toppings on top of the patties to prevent the bottom bun from getting soggy.

This burger tasted strongly of mustard, but we enjoyed the classic toppings.

A thin slice of cheese separated the two burger patties, and we thought the lettuce and tomato tasted fresh. However, we had mixed feelings about the mustard.

The mustard almost overpowered the other ingredients, and the additional patty made the burger so juicy that the bread was nearly flattened. Still, we thought the burger patties were cooked perfectly and had an excellent texture.

It was a great classic burger, similar to one we might make at a cookout. However, we all agreed that when dining out, we prefer to choose more creative options.

We also tried the single-patty Oldtimer burger without cheese.

The Oldtimer cost $13.29, excluding tax, at our local Chili's in Glendale, New York.

The Oldtimer comes with one burger patty, lettuce, tomato, red onion, and mustard.

We were interested to see how this burger compared to the others, which were all topped with cheese.

This was the simplest and most traditional burger we tried.

Unlike with the double, we could distinctly taste all the ingredients since there was no second patty to overpower the flavor of the toppings. We also surprisingly didn't miss the cheese — the burger was so juicy and moist, it didn't need it.

However, the mustard was still a little strong. One of us thought the addition of ketchup would have balanced out the burger more, but another reporter thought it was fine without it.

The Mushroom Swiss burger was divisive.

The Mushroom Swiss Burger cost $14.79, excluding tax, at our local Chili's in Glendale, New York.

The Mushroom Swiss burger comes with sauteed onions, mushrooms, Swiss cheese, lettuce, tomato, and mayonnaise.

This burger was stacked high, with mushrooms falling out of the bun. One of our reporters, in particular, is a big fan of mushrooms, and these ones looked perfectly cooked and came in a hearty serving. We were excited to try it.

The sauteed onions were crunchy and balanced out the moist texture of the mushrooms.

This burger tasted earthy but not overpowering, thanks to the generous serving of mushrooms, but the onions were the secret star.

The burger patty, which was cooked medium, kept its shape while adding moisture, as did the mushrooms. The lettuce, onions, and tomato balanced out the burger by adding crunch, and the creamy mayonnaise pulled it all together.

One of our reporters actually deemed this burger as their second favorite, but it was beaten in the overall ranking.

The BBQ Brisket Burger was our next favorite.

The BBQ Brisket Burger cost $17.59, excluding tax.

The BBQ Brisket Burger has one beef patty and is topped with pulled brisket, the chain's new housemade barbecue sauce, cheddar cheese, and pickles.

The beef patty was topped with a slice of cheddar cheese, pickles, and a mound of pulled brisket slathered in Chili's sweet barbecue sauce.

Meat was by far the star of this burger.

The combination of the soft and moist pulled brisket and the crispy yet juicy patty worked well for this burger, especially when combined with the barbecue sauce that we caught a noticeable whiff of even before tucking in to eat.

The sweetness of the sauce also provided a solid balance to the tartness of the pickles.

One of our reporters, who usually reaches for ketchup when eating burgers, noticed she didn't feel the need with this burger.

Since we were splitting the burger, we didn't feel it was overwhelmingly meaty. However, as much as we enjoyed our smaller portions, we could imagine eating a whole burger by ourselves could result in meat overload.

The Just Bacon Burger was reminiscent of a BLT sandwich.

The Just Bacon Burger cost $14.99, excluding tax.

The Just Bacon Burger has one beef patty topped with bacon, cheddar cheese, pickles, lettuce, red onion, tomato, and mayonnaise.

Despite its size and plentiful ingredients, this burger looked to be holding up decently within its bun. We were curious to see if that would be the case after we portioned it out. After cutting it into four pieces, each section did hold up.

The tomato was thick, and the bacon was glazed nicely.

The ingredients in this burger, besides the patty, reminded us of a familiar favorite: a BLT. But what worked so well was that we could taste each component, as none overpowered the other.

There was a generous amount of crispy bacon, the slice of tomato was thick and juicy, and the mayo-covered lettuce added a touch of freshness to each bite.

As much as we enjoyed it, we ended up placing two burgers ahead that were just as delicious but more unique.

The Big Smasher was coated in a refreshing sauce.

The Big Smasher Burger cost $14.39, excluding tax.

The Big Smasher comes topped with shredded lettuce, diced red onions, pickles, American cheese, and Thousand Island dressing.

The Thousand Island dressing was dripping from all sides of the burger. One reporter remarked that we should've worn bibs.

It looked like the Big Smasher Burger was going to be a saucy mess, but the dressing turned out to be one of our favorite aspects.

The saucy burger was tangy, juicy, and ideal for the summer.

The Big Smasher Burger wasn't the easiest to handle, as it left our hands slick with sauce, but it made up for the mess with flavor.

The Thousand Island dressing was creamy and thick, yet refreshing and tangy, helped by an assortment of red onions and pickles. It completely coated the juicy patty. Despite the heavy amount of dressing and juices, the bun remained intact, unlike some other burgers on the menu.

It had a tasty zing that we felt made it an ideal burger to eat in the summer.

Our favorite burger was inspired by the Southwest.

The Alex's Santa Fe Burger cost $16.29, excluding tax, at our local Chili's in Glendale, New York.

Alex's Santa Fe Burger had the most distinctive toppings.

It came with one beef patty, avocado, pepper jack cheese, red onion, jalapeños, tomato, pickles, cilantro, and the chain's spicy Santa Fe sauce.

The burger — named for Chili's sous chef Alex Gomez, who created it — is as flavorful as it is colorful.

We reached a quick consensus that Alex's Sante Fe Burger was our favorite burger as it was by far the most creative and authentic.

Created by Chili's sous chef Alex Gomez in 2018, the burger is jam-packed with as many flavors as it has colorful ingredients.

The jalapeños and slightly smoky Sante Fe sauce gave each bite a kick, but the slices of avocado and tomato, the juicy patty, and the cheese balanced it out. As one reporter noted, it's spicy but not to the level that has you immediately reaching for a glass of water.

The burger's brightness and freshness helped it live up to its Southwestern-inspired name and made it our top choice on the menu.

This definitely wasn't your average chain-restaurant burger — and it cemented Chili's as the casual-dining chain to watch, in our humble opinions.

• Fox will release "Universal Basic Guys," a new animated series, this fall.
• The show satirizes universal basic income. It stars two brothers in a $3,000-a-month program.
• While basic income programs have become popular in the US, they are not without detractors.

If you do anything successfully for long enough, someone is bound to make a quippy cartoon about it. Basic income programs are the next victim, now on Fox.

"Universal Basic Guys" stars a pair of brothers who join a $3,000-a-month basic income program after the hot dog factory where they work becomes automated. A universal basic income is often cited as a potential solution to the likely job losses created by artificial intelligence.

The animated series is co-produced by Fox Entertainment and Sony Pictures Television. Fox and Sony first ordered the first season in 2022. It is scheduled to premiere in the fall, but Fox has already ordered a second season.

The show follows brothers Mark and Hank Hoagies. Destitute and looking for purpose, the brothers discover their town has a "radical universal basic income" pilot program.

The show is a satirical take on the numerous basic income pilots that cities across the United States have experimented with in recent years. Most of these are guaranteed basic income programs, which target low-income residents by offering them monthly cash payments with no strings attached. Most programs, like one in Iowa that gives low-income residents $500 a month, report that recipients spend most of the funds on essentials like rent and food.

A universal basic income was made popular by entrepreneur Andrew Yang during the 2020 presidential election and continues to be a favorite talking point for tech CEOs working in the AI industry. A universal basic income would give monthly no-strings-attached cash payments to everyone, regardless of their financial status.

While more cities are experimenting with basic income programs, they have also been the target of conservative ire. Some lawmakers have criticized the programs as akin to socialism, while others have called them unconstitutional. A common refrain is that basic incomes encourage recipients not to work, though studies have shown the opposite.

For the Hoagies brothers, the monthly payments allow them to relive their youth with some local friends. The program the brothers join is a universal program, meaning all members of the town receive $3,000 a month.

"Mark, Hank, and the rest of their local buddies are once again kids in the summertime, overflowing with the perilous combo of free time and stupid ideas," the show's description says. "This is a show about men trying to find purpose in a world where they're no longer needed."

"Universal Basic Guys" is set to join Fox's "Animation Domination" lineup. Promotional marketing for the show features the main character, Mark Hoagies, alongside Homer Simpson of "The Simpsons" and Bob of "Bob's Burgers," two other downtrodden animated patriarchs popular on Fox.

In a statement, Michael Thorn, Fox's network president, said that co-creators and executive producers Adam and Craig Malamut are "two of the boldest and most irreverent voices" on television. The brothers are best known for their work on "Game of Zones," a popular "Game of Thrones" parody about the NBA that ran for seven seasons on Bleacher Report.

Sony Pictures Television Studios and the Malamut brothers did not immediately return a request for comment from Business Insider.

• Demand for EVs has slowed in recent months amid concerns about cost, charging, and range.
• Startups and scientists are attempting to change that by using AI to design new EV batteries.
• Experts say AI could dramatically speed up battery development, bringing us closer to better EVs. 

EV sales have been accelerating, but they appear to have hit a speed bump.

Demand for electric vehicles in the US has slumped over the past year, with automakers rolling back hefty investments as sales grow more slowly than expected.

Surveys have shown that consumers are turning away from EVs due to concerns about cost, charging, and range. All of these have their roots in the most expensive and crucial part of any electric vehicle — the battery.

Jason Koeller, cofounder of battery startup Chemix, thinks that could change, thanks to AI.

"When you think about EV adoption, nearly all of the reasons why people don't want to buy EVs have something to do with the battery," he told Business Insider.

"Either it's too expensive or the range isn't long enough, it doesn't charge fast enough, or there are perceived safety concerns — whatever it is, it all boils down to the battery," he added.

The AI wave hits EVs

California-based Chemix, which raised $20 million in investment in April, is one of several startups and research labs looking to solve many of these issues with the help of AI.

Chemix is using machine-learning algorithms to develop EV batteries that can charge more quickly, hold more energy, and last longer than current EV power units.

Another common complaint drivers have about EVs is their tendency to lose performance in hotter and colder climates, an issue Chemix's custom-designed batteries could help address.

The startup's AI tech can also be used to filter out common battery materials, such as nickel and cobalt, that have been linked to human rights abuses.

Koeller said the primary advantage of using AI to design EV batteries is that it dramatically speeds up the process. A 2020 study in Nature found that machine learning models could reduce the time it took to identify a fast-charging battery design from 500 days to 16.

"The problem we're solving is really to speed up the pace of battery development," Koeller said, adding that this would be crucial to producing EVs that can hold their own against combustion-engine counterparts.

"We're definitely going to need significantly better battery performance and it's our belief that the way that we get there is by doing battery development in a fundamentally different way," he added.

Better EV batteries

Designing EV batteries is a three-step process, Georgia Tech assistant professor Micah Ziegler told BI.

Scientists must first decide on a structure and combination of elements that will produce a battery material with the desired properties before developing a recipe to synthesize it and testing that material in a lab.

The sheer number of potential combinations and the variety of demands placed on EV batteries — including longevity, safety, cost, and charging speed — makes designing batteries a lengthy and difficult process, Ziegler said.

"The number of options is just vast. Once you start putting different elements together, we're talking about potentially trillions of different combinations," he added.

AI could dramatically speed up this process, identifying potentially promising combinations far quicker than humans can.

Karl Mueller, a physical chemist at the Pacific Northwest National Laboratory, described battery design as an "Edisonian" task: a drawn-out process of trial and error in which scientists compare and tweak billions of chemical combinations.

"The process is slow, and it can take years to find new materials and modify them," he told BI.

PNNL recently teamed up with Microsoft to discover a promising new material for making EV batteries using the latter's AI and cloud-computing technology.

The solid-state electrolyte they discovered relies less on lithium, an increasingly rare resource that forms the core of today's EV batteries. It is also less likely to catch fire than lithium-ion batteries.

'It's going to be phenomenal'

Mueller said incorporating AI into PNNL's workflow allowed the lab to dramatically speed up the process of whittling down 32 million possible chemical combinations to around 20 potential battery designs.

"The newest AI tools that we've been working on with Microsoft, it's allowed us to design for specific properties and to weed out things early that we believe won't have those properties," he said.

"It's going to be phenomenal for speeding up the discovery process. I think it's going to drive the speed of the discovery for what we need to do to allow for more electrification and better electric vehicles," Mueller added.

The hype around generative AI may be fading in some quarters, but one area where it's already reaping clear benefits is the scientific community.

Models such as DeepMind's AlphaFold 3 have improved the mapping of complex biological proteins, potentially opening up new opportunities for researchers to quickly develop life-saving drugs.

Mueller said that PNNL's collaboration with Microsoft has convinced him that generative AI could have applications far beyond speeding up EV battery design.

"This idea of building science agents based around large language models and coupling that to these discovery workflows, is very, very exciting," he said.

"I think in a year or two we're not going to recognize where science has got to."

• My boyfriend surprised me with a dog on my birthday.
• Raising the dog in a small apartment was difficult, but he became like a child to us.
• When we broke up, we fought over who should keep the dog; I ultimately gave up custody.

I vividly remember the day Mucho arrived.

My birthday had been unusually low-key, and my boyfriend seemed preoccupied. That evening, I found out why. My boyfriend finally revealed the big surprise: a Saint Bernard puppy lying in a large cardboard box in his car's trunk.

At first, the puppy's breed shocked me. Mucho was destined to outgrow our small apartment quickly. His name, derived from the Spanish word for "too much," reflected the overwhelming responsibility we were about to undertake. But Mucho quickly became a loved and cherished member of our little family.

So when things soured with my partner, everything got complicated with Mucho.

We had to first learn what was right for Mucho

My partner — then in the process of taking over his family business — spent long hours at work and thought a dog would keep me company during his long absences for work trips. However, he might not have fully considered the level of care a pet requires. The first two months were a whirlwind of adjustments — furniture rearrangements, veterinary visits, vaccinations, and potty training.

I juggled walking Mucho in the mornings with my full-time marketing job while my boyfriend took the evening shifts. Sometimes, we had to hire a professional dog walker to ensure Mucho got the exercise he needed. Thankfully, my workplace was pet-friendly, allowing me to bring Mucho on days when the house help didn't show up. My partner also occasionally took him to his office, where Mucho's cuteness charmed everyone.

My partner's family lived in a beautiful, spacious house on the city's outskirts — a stark and welcome contrast to our cramped apartment.

Visiting their home, we quickly realized how much happier Mucho was with the extra space, fresh air, and soft grass. He roamed freely, looking majestic as he strutted down the paved driveway. He loved the outdoors and sprawled on the cool marble floors indoors.

Mucho had ample room to play and relax inside the house, and he received abundant attention from my partner's family, who absolutely adored him. Mucho thrived in this environment, enjoying the freedom and space that our city apartment lacked.

We started spending weekends at my partner's family home, blurring the lines between our live-in relationship and marriage. For a year, we lived as a family, sharing meals, chores, and the inevitable drama. Our love for Mucho kept us sane amid the chaos.

Saying goodbye was the hardest

Despite our efforts, my relationship with my partner began to strain. At 27, I felt ready for marriage, but he had other priorities. Periods of high-intensity drama between us were interspersed with periods of taking time off from each other. Our differences led to a painful decision to part ways, but Mucho remained a contentious issue.

I felt he should stay with me as the person whom Mucho was gifted to; I was also his primary caretaker. My partner argued that the dog wouldn't have come into our lives without his decision to get Mucho. I argued that Mucho had spent more days living in the apartment and, therefore, was more comfortable there. The volley that came back was that Mucho was more comfortable at his family's suburban home.

Unable to reach an amicable solution, we continued our routine: Mucho stayed with me on weekdays and my partner on weekends. However, the emotional toll of our breakup and raising a large dog in a small apartment affected my mental and physical health.

Eventually, I decided to move back to my parents' city, which was an hour's flight or a 17-hour drive away. The logistics of relocating Mucho were daunting. Flying required repeated sedation, and a 17-hour drive was downright impractical. Most reluctantly, I concluded that Mucho was better off staying with my ex-partner in the spacious suburban home he loved.

Saying goodbye to Mucho was one of the hardest things I've ever done. He was more than just a pet; he was my dog child, whom I loved so deeply. We were a source of comfort and joy to each other. Despite the heartache, I prioritized Mucho's well-being over my own desires.

• Art teachers Loreal Hemenway and Stephanie Osmundson wore their wedding dresses to work.
• The teachers captured their colleagues' reactions in a video on their Instagram page.
• The duo's story highlights the fun ways to reuse wedding dresses.

With the average US wedding costing $33,000, it makes sense to get the most out of your wedding-day purchases.

So Loreal Hemenway and Stephanie Osmundson, two elementary school art teachers in Henderson, Nevada, found a creative way to use their wedding dresses again.

Their school administrators sent out an email in January about a professional development day themed "Back of the Closet" and asked staff to find the "hidden gem" in their closets.

While some of their colleagues wore old Letterman jackets and sports jerseys, "the idea came to mind that we should dig truly to the backends of our closet and wear our wedding gowns to school," Hemenway told Business Insider.

They decided to capture their coworkers' reactions and share the video on their Instagram page, Happily Ever Elementary, which has over 270,000 followers. Their reel, which they uploaded in January, has since had 11,000 likes.

"There's always a little bit of a shock value to everything, but at the end of the day, I don't think anyone we worked with was even remotely surprised that we'd do that," said Osmundson.

Having fun with the theme

Osmundson has been teaching for eight years; Hemenway for 10. Both women, who've shared an art-teacher position for three years, originally started in kindergarten, a grade they say allows more silliness and fun.

"If the teachers aren't matching the energy of kids and bringing the energy, then what's the point? So we're always the ones that try and bring extra fun factor and engagement through costumes," said Osmundson.

But Hemenway, who got married 10 years ago, and Osmundson, who has been married for seven years, only agreed to arrive in their wedding dresses if the other one promised to as well.

After Hemenway dug out her gown from her old bedroom in her parents' house, the friends exchanged photos of their dresses, which still fit.

They also had the support of their husbands. The Hemenways took a photograph together to mark their 10th anniversary a little early, while the Osmundsons celebrated by dancing in the house.

"It was really nostalgic and meaningful," Osmundson said. "I think that was an unexpected perk of embarrassing ourselves that day."

Then it was time to to show their colleagues.

"We were very nervous and anxious about what it would look like when we walked into our staff," said Hemenway. "So we waited until the room was pretty full before we walked in, and we were only met with laughs and smiles, which was great."

In the video, the two women walk into the school in their white, floor-length gowns, accessorized with their backpacks and water bottles. Their colleagues can be heard laughing and cheering, and one yells out, "Oh yes!"

Osmundson thinks the experience teaches a good lesson.

"Your students are going to gain a lot of excitement from what you do, but just don't be scared to do things," she said. "A lot of the time, what you build up in your head is a fleeting thought in other people's minds."

It also turned out to be an unexpected bonding moment with two other staff members who were wearing bridesmaids' dresses.

"So even though things can be intimidating, I think doing things that sometimes scare us or might embarrass us are still worth a try," she added.

Reusing and preserving a costly item

According to The Knot Real Weddings Study, which surveyed nearly 10,000 US couples who got married last year, the average wedding dress cost in 2023 was about $2,000.

Hemenway and Osmundson's story is one example of how brides are finding creative, head-turning ways to get more wear out of their dresses. Some brides have opted to wear their gowns for casual nights out, while others have worn them to formal events.

Some brides choose to professionally preserve their dresses, which can cost between $250 and $1,000, the Knot reported. The process includes restoring and cleaning the dress before wrapping it and placing it inside a box.

It can help a bride pass down their dress to a future generation or turn it into another garment — TikTok videos show brides wearing hand-me-down gowns for rehearsal dinners or receptions. Preservation could also help a bride sell their dress.

Hemenway's dress from Bowties Bridal cost around $1,800, while Osmundson's cost around $1,000 from Brilliant Bridal. Before this experience, they hadn't meticulously stored their dresses, but now they want to be more intentional about preserving them.

"I think moving forward when we put ours away, we showed them a little bit more love and affection," said Hemenway.

After all, there could be another dress-up day.