Beyond Meat's plant-based products, which mimic the taste, look, and feel of real meat, are taking the fast-food industry by storm.

The company's signature "bleeding" veggie burger is now on menus at 9 food chains, including TGI Fridays, Carl's Jr., and A&W. Starting Tuesday, customers can also order Beyond's nuggets and wings at a Kentucky Fried Chicken in Atlanta. Subway also plans to sell a Beyond Meat meatball sub starting next month.

The Beyond Burger is often billed as a healthier and more environmentally friendly alternative to beef, but many consumers have been skeptical about its processed nature.

Earlier this month, a group called the Center for Consumer Freedom — which is funded by some food companies and restaurants — ran a series of full-page ads in the New York Post and Wall Street Journal highlighting the chemical additives in alternative meat products. The ads used the slogan "Fake Meat, Real Chemicals" and compared the ingredients in "real" and "fake" bacon.

We asked four nutritionists to weigh in on this debate by evaluating the 22 ingredients in a Beyond Meat patty. Most of them classified the burger as a "sometimes" item, meaning it can be healthy to eat on occasion as a substitute for real beef.

Read more: How the Beyond Burger and the Impossible Burger actually compare when it comes to calories, sodium, and more

Coconut oil might be the most concerning ingredient

Beyond Burgers aren't necessarily less fatty or caloric than their real-meat counterparts, but that doesn't necessarily mean they're bad for you.

For the most part, the Beyond Burger's ingredients are relatively nutritious.

Two nutritionists praised the fact that the burger contains 2 grams of fiber, or 8% of the recommended daily value. A few also said the burger was a good source of protein, since it has the same protein content of a traditional 3-ounce beef patty (around 20 grams).

Compared to its competitor, the Impossible Burger, nutritionists said the Beyond Burger had the healthier protein source.

A 4-ounce Beyond Meat patty contains 250 calories. Leanna Garfield/Business Insider

"In my opinion, Beyond and Impossible are very different," said Cynthia Sass, a New York-based performance nutritionist. "Impossible's main protein source is soy, one of the 'big 8' most common allergens."

The Beyond Burger, on the other hand, uses pea protein isolate, which most people find easily digestible. The ingredient can, however, cause increased gastrointestinal discomfort if people aren't used to it, said Vandana Sheth, a registered dietitian nutritionist.

One element that had nutritionists divided was the burger's saturated fat content (6 grams). Two nutritionists saw the content as low compared to similar veggie burgers on the market, but Amy Gorin, a registered dietitian nutritionist, had one reservation.

"I don't love that the patties are made with coconut oil," she said. "This is a source of saturated fat, and you'll see that one burger contains 30% of the [recommended] daily value." Because coconut oil contains more saturated fat than butter or lard, many nutritionists recommend using it sparingly.

The Beyond Burger is still a healthy choice, in moderation

While all four nutritionists recognized the Beyond Burger as a processed food, that doesn't qualify it as "junk food." Lots of foods we might consider healthy, like Greek yogurt, cheese, or almond butter, are also processed.

The Beyond Burger sold at TGI Friday's. TGI Fridays

Pamela Bonney, a registered dietitian nutritionist, said the Beyond Burger is "highly processed," which typically means a product has been heavily altered and contains additives. Highly processed foods are often "ready-to-eat" items like candy, potato chips, diet soda, or microwavable meals.

Overall, Sass said, we should eat less of these processed foods and substitute whole ingredients instead. Research from the National Institutes of Health suggests that processed foods cause people to consume an extra 500 calories a day and ultimately gain more weight.

But compared to many other "highly processed" foods, Bonney said, the Beyond Burger uses particularly high-quality ingredients like mung bean protein, apple extract, and pomegranate fruit powder.

When it comes to choosing between a Beyond Burger and a real meat patty, the nutritionists agreed that the veggie burger was the healthier choice.

"I do believe that plant options that displace red meat are a step in the right direction," Sass said, adding that red meat is tied to some of our "most prevalent chronic diseases" like type 2 diabetes and heart disease. Processed meats like sausage, bacon, and hot dogs could also increase the risk of stomach and bowel cancers.

What's more, red meat plays a role in the climate crisis, which Sass called "a major public health risk." The World Resources Institute estimates that cutting the world's beef consumption by 70% could reduce greenhouse-gas emissions by around 35%.

"The truth is that ... the protein source [we consume] does matter, both for human health and the health of the planet," Sass said.

That means Beyond Burgers can be part of a healthy diet, but shouldn't be your protein source for every meal.

Oracle is still fighting for JEDI.

The tech giant on Monday said it has filed an appeal related to a federal judge's decision to reject its bid to be reconsidered for the Pentagon's $10 billion Joint Enterprise Defense Infrastructure, or JEDI, project.

"The procurement was unlawful on several grounds," Dorian Daley, Oracle's general counsel, said in a statement.

The legal tussle began when the Defense Department decided to name Microsoft and Amazon as the finalists for its plan to build a cloud platform that will store and manage sensitive military and defense data.

Oracle challenged the decision, saying the bidding process was "riddled with improprieties" that largely favored Amazon, including undisclosed employment and bonus offers to DOD officials. The software giant also argued that the standards the DOD set for the contract were unfair.

A federal judge ruled against Oracle last month, saying "individual conflicts of interest did not impact the procurement."

In announcing Oracle's decision to appeal, Daley cited a separate and previously sealed opinion by the same federal judge that was critical of the JEDI bidding process.

The opinion, Daley said, "acknowledges that the procurement suffers from many significant conflicts of interest. These conflicts violate the law and undermine the public trust."

But Christopher Cornillie, a Bloomberg Government analyst, said that while the judge raised concerns in that opinion, "those concerns were rendered moot by his determination that Oracle had been fairly eliminated from competition."

"The top priority for Oracle's legal team will be making the case that it does, in fact, have standing to protest JEDI," Cornillie told Business Insider. "It'll be interesting to see how they do that."

Oracle's appeal marks another twist in the JEDI project. The Defense Department had planned to announce the contract winner as early as late August.

But the Trump administration asked the Defense Department to review the bidding process, raising the possibility that the JEDI contract would be delayed. There was speculation that Trump's high-profile feud with Amazon CEO Jeff Bezos could be a factor for the White House's request.

Two weeks ago, the Defense Department's Inspector General's Office said it had assembled a team of editors, investigators, and attorneys to review the project.

"We are investigating whether current or former DOD officials committed misconduct relating to the JEDI acquisition, such as whether any had any conflicts of interest related to their involvement in the acquisition process," DOD spokesperson Dwrena Allen told Business Insider.

Got a tip about Oracle or another tech company? Contact this reporter via email at This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it., message him on Twitter@benpimentel. You can also contact Business Insider securely via SecureDrop.

Vice Media has made leadership changes at its agency Virtue Worldwide as another one of the firm's founding execs leaves.

Ryan Mack, who has been at Virtue Worldwide since its inception in 2017, starting as chief operating officer and rising to president of Virtue a year and a half ago, is exiting the company. Before Virtue Worldwide, Mack was president for four years of Carrot, Vice's digital agency that was later merged into Virtue in 2017.

Read more: Refinery29's finances are getting tight, and it's urgently trying to close a deal with Vice Media, sources say

Mack is just the latest in a string of key execs to leave Virtue in the past few months, including Cameron Farrelly, its chief creative officer, and RG Logan, its strategy head.

The exits come as the venture-backed youth-focused media company is looking to Virtue to help it become profitable. They also come at a time of unease at the company, as it tries to repair its reputation and culture after reports of mistreatment of female employees.

Virtue combined its operations under one president

Virtue Worldwide today promoted Rob Newlan to global president from CEO overseeing EMEA and Asia; in his new role, he'll oversee all of Virtue's 21 offices, adding Latin America and North America to his responsibilities.

Also promoted was Krystle Watler, who is now the managing director of North America. Watler was previously a senior vice president and head of business development in North America.

Virtue didn't name an exact replacement for Farrelly's role but hired Simon Mogren, a vet of agencies like DDB, Ogilvy, and BBDO, as executive creative director for the US. Virtue has also hired a new head of strategy who hasn't been named publicly.

Virtue reports up to Dominique Delport, the president of international and global chief revenue officer of Vice Media. In an interview, Delport praised Mack's contributions to Virtue and said he had expressed a desire to go into the startup world.

Delport said the elevation of Newlan and Watler made sense as the company stretches its business across 20-plus markets and looks to get bigger commitments from clients in addition to project-based work.

"If you look at global brands, we have big global brands in the USA, but in volume we have more global brands that are not domestic brands, and we have a great opportunity internationally," he said.

Virtue was founded in 2005 as a creative agency, and it is one of just a handful of publisher-owned ad agencies. In 2017, Vice Media combined it with other standalone agencylike businesses into the full-service agency called Virtue Worldwide.

Vice Media has been putting more resources behind the agency after enduring a write-down in value by Disney and laying off 10% of its staff.

Vice Media CEO Nancy Dubuc, who took over in March 2018, has been trying to tie the company's units together under a new phrase, "One Vice." Virtue has historically operated independently, with most of its work being direct with clients and not tied to Vice Media properties.

Some there have felt that the separation insulated them from cultural problems at other parts of the company and questioned what the new slogan means for Virtue's independence.

Vice's CRO said Virtue would continue to tap the rest of Vice's resources for clients

Asked what One Vice means for Virtue, Watler and Delport talked up collaboration between Virtue and the rest of the company. Watler said being a publisher-born agency was a unique differentiator for Virtue because it let Virtue access Vice's assets. "It allows us to be the thinkers and strategists but also the makers," she said.

Virtue regularly taps into Vice's capabilities, less so for buying media on Vice's own sites, which some advertisers can shy away from because of the edgy content, but more for its production and data expertise, Delport said.

"It's not a white-label agency," he said. "We're here to connect the brands with the audience we know the best and leverage the insights and production we built at Vice."

August has long made some of the best smart locks you can buy, and now its third-generation lock has been discounted significantly. The 3rd-generation August Smart Lock is on sale for $81.99 at Best Buy, which is $68 cheaper than the standard price of $149.99. It's also on sale at Amazon for $106.18.

There are a number of reasons the lock is such a great option. The lock is super easy to install because it works with your existing deadbolt, so you don't have to get rid of your existing keys to use the lock manually.

One of the best things about the lock is that it makes it easy to allow others into your home without having to share keys. In the August app, you can quickly and easily add another user, and then revoke access when they no longer need it, which is a nice touch.

The August Smart Lock allows you to control your lock from your phone, so if you happen to go to bed and forget to lock the door, you don't necessarily have to get back up.

Out of the box, the August Smart Lock doesn't work remotely, but if you buy the August Connect, you'll be able to control the lock from anywhere you have an internet connection. Plus, the lock will work with other smart home ecosystems, including Apple HomeKit, Google Assistant, and Amazon Alexa.

Get the August Smart Lock 3rd-generation from Best Buy, $81.99 (originally $149.99) [You save $68]

Get the August Smart Lock 3rd generation from Amazon, $106.18 (originally $149.99) [You save $43.81]

All summer long, some of the US's premier librarians have publicly clashed with Microsoft and its subsidiary LinkedIn. The dispute involves a rule change Microsoft made for using a career development and training website it owns — a change the libraries say violates people's privacy.

The website, previously known as Lynda.com, offers thousands of online classes on topics like personal branding, marketing, software development, and web development. It's been available to library patrons for 20 years.

Today Lynda.com is known as LinkedIn Learning.

That's because in 2015, Lynda.com was acquired by LinkedIn. And a year later, in 2016, Microsoft acquired LinkedIn.

For three years after Microsoft owned the training site, it allowed library patrons to access the Lynda/LinkedIn learning catalog of online classes the way they always had, with just their library card and a PIN.

But in June, LinkedIn changed course and announced that all library users would have to sign up for a LinkedIn account and hand over at least their name and email address, if not a fully filled-out profile, to use the Lynda training materials.

Read more: Amazon adds fear detection and age ranges to its facial-recognition tech as the Border Patrol looks to award a $950 million contract

The libraries were not pleased. They said requiring library users to register and identify themselves to Microsoft violated not only the librarians' sacred principles of privacy — that your patterns of library use are private — but in some cases the law. California has a state law that says in part: "All patron use records of any library ... shall remain confidential," Greg Lucas, California's state librarian, pointed out in an editorial about this change.

Librarians argued that by registering on LinkedIn, library patrons would be making themselves publicly searchable, by default, on the internet. LinkedIn replied that LinkedIn users were free to use LinkedIn's privacy settings, including one that keeps a LinkedIn profile from being found by the search engines Bing and Google.

Such privacy settings, however, do not keep a person's information given to LinkedIn from being seen and used by LinkedIn and, by association, Microsoft. In fact, LinkedIn's terms of service make it clear that sharing data with the company gives the company the right to use it for things like serving ads. It uses free accounts to try to upsell people to paid accounts.

Take it or leave

In July, both the American Library Association and the California State Library recommended that libraries stop offering Lynda to their patrons.

A library activism site called Every Library followed the developments. "Erin Berman, Chair of the Intellectual Freedom Committee's Privacy Subcommittee visited the LinkedIn headquarters in San Francisco and met with their product team," Every Library reported. "She exchanged abundant emails with their staff, trying to find a workable solution that met the ethical requirements of libraries."

Even so, in early August, LinkedIn doubled down and told the libraries that it wasn't going to modify its rules.

Read more: Bill Gates just learned how to cook a chicken thanks to Washington's Teacher of the Year

It posted a second message in which it explained: "We've listened to feedback from the library community and want to provide some additional background on why we are making these changes ... Profiles help us ensure we give our members a safe, trusted environment where they can interact with real people."

If libraries didn't like this new term, it added, they were free to find a catalog of training courses elsewhere.

"We deeply respect their position and understand if they choose to not use LinkedIn Learning," that blog post said.

A LinkedIn representative also told ZDNet's Mary Jo Foley that the company wasn't insisting that all users of LinkedIn Learnings create LinkedIn accounts. Those corporate and higher-education customers, i.e., companies that paid premium subscription prices, weren't being held to the same new requirement.

This is because it trusted those customers' own technology to determine who the users were. "A LinkedIn profile is optional for our corporate and higher-education customers as they offer authentication solutions that are very difficult to compromise," the representative said.

To reiterate: LinkedIn was forbidding libraries to allow access to training videos with a library card and PIN because it didn't know who the users were. It didn't think it was "safe" to allow these users to continue to access these services, even though it had been providing access to these resources for decades.

Neither LinkedIn nor Microsoft ever really explained what the safety implications were.

Neither acknowledged that a LinkedIn account wasn't a foolproof method of identifying people. LinkedIn has acknowledged having a pretty big fake-user-profile problem, though it is cracking down on that. It said that from January to June it removed 21.6 million fake accounts and prevented another 19.5 million fake accounts.

The impact is on the poorest people

But there's something even more sad and baffling about this situation. Think about the socioeconomic status of the people who rely on library computers. Particularly if they are coming to the library to take a career-development course. A 2010 study paid for by the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation found that people living below the federal poverty line had the highest use of library computers.

This is the third time this summer that Microsoft has been called out after trying to increase its monetization on populations to whom it has traditionally offered bargains. This includes ratcheting up fees on CERN, the scientific research organization that found the "God Particle" and where the web was invented. Those fees were so high CERN has vowed to ditch all its Microsoft tech and teach others how to do so as well.

It also changed a term that would force its reseller business partners to start paying high prices for Microsoft software. A backlash on that caused Microsoft to change its mind and rescind the new fee structure.

And now it is telling libraries that it won't let patrons continue to use its LinkedIn training materials, as they have for 20 years, unless patrons sign up for a LinkedIn account and allow Microsoft to gather data on them, even if such tracking may violate some state laws.

All of this comes via the backdrop of a change of heart from the Business Roundtable, one of the most powerful corporate lobbying organizations. Earlier this month the group changed the definition of the purpose of a corporation. No longer is its primary purpose to return maximum profit to its shareholders, they said. A corporation's current purpose is to "benefit of all stakeholders — customers, employees, suppliers, communities and shareholders."

Some 181 CEOs of the nation's largest companies signed that definition including the CEOs of Amazon, Apple, BlackRock, IBM, JPMorgan Chase, and Walmart.

Microsoft CEO Satya Nadella previously told Business Insider: "I think it is important for companies like ours to have a set a principles that governs some of the most important things like privacy, security, or immigration and take a stand."

But guess who isn't a member of the Business Roundtable and didn't sign the recent statement? Satya Nadella.

A LinkedIn representative told Business Insider that this decision was made by LinkedIn, not its owner, Microsoft. The person sent Business Insider the following statement:

"As part of the migration from Lynda.com, the company we acquired four years ago, to LinkedIn Learning, we now require a profile to access courses on LinkedIn Learning. Profiles help us to authenticate that users are real people and help to ensure we give our members a safe, trusted environment to interact with others and learn. A LinkedIn profile is optional for our corporate and higher education customers as they offer authentication solutions that are very difficult to compromise.

"Every user has the ability to control their profile and can change their privacy settings and they can also choose to not have their profile searchable on search engines. We always respect the decisions of our members and do not share personal data that is restricted by a member's privacy settings."

"Why don't we nuke them?" President Donald Trump asked during a White House briefing about hurricanes, according to an Axios report.

Trump was advocating for a nuclear solution to the tropical storms that hit the southeastern US, according to Axios.

Sources who heard the president's private remarks told Axios that Trump asked senior officials something along the lines of, "They start forming off the coast of Africa, as they're moving across the Atlantic, we drop a bomb inside the eye of the hurricane and it disrupts it. Why can't we do that?"

The concept of nuking a hurricane isn't new: During the late 1950s, one scientist floated the idea of using nuclear explosives to "modify hurricane paths and intensities."

But an article by hurricane researchers at the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) debunks that idea. They wrote that it's impossible to disrupt a hurricane with a nuclear bomb, since we don't have powerful enough bombs and because the explosives wouldn't shift the surrounding air pressure for more than a split second.

How a hurricane forms

Hurricanes are vast low-pressure cyclones with wind speeds over 74 mph that form over warm water in the mid-Atlantic Ocean. When warm moisture rises, it releases energy, forming thunderstorms. As more thunderstorms are created, the winds spiral upward and outward, creating a vortex. Clouds then form in the upper atmosphere as the warm air condenses.

As the winds churn, an area of low pressure forms over the ocean's surface and helps feed a hurricane's cyclonic shape.

Read more: Here's why hurricanes are getting stronger, slower, and wetter.

Shayanne Gal/Business Insider

If any part of this weather cycle dissipates — either the warm air or the area of low pressure — the hurricane loses strength and breaks down.

So in 1959, Jack Reed, a meteorologist at Sandia National Laboratories, raised the possibility of disrupting hurricane-forming weather conditions using nuclear weapons.

Reed theorized that nuclear explosives could stop hurricanes by pushing warm air up and out of the storm's eye, which would enable colder air to take its place. That, he thought, would lead to the low-pressure air fueling the storm to dissipate and ultimately weaken the hurricane.

Reed suggested two means of delivering the nuke into the hurricane's eye.

"Delivery should present no particular problem," Reed wrote.

The first delivery method, he said, would be an air drop, though "a more suitable delivery would be from a submarine."

A submarine, he said, could "penetrate a storm eye underwater" and "launch a missile-borne device" there before diving to safety.

But according to the NOAA researchers' article, there are two issues with Reed's idea.

Hurricanes emit a mind-boggling amount of energy

Hurricanes are extremely powerful: A fully developed hurricane releases the same amount of energy as the explosion of a 10-megaton nuke every 20 minutes, the NOAA article says. That's more than 666 times bigger than the "Little Boy" bomb that the US dropped on Hiroshima, Japan, in 1945.

The mushroom cloud after the US Air Force's detonation of an atomic bomb over Hiroshima, Japan, on August 6, 1945. Time Life Pictures/US Army Air Force/The LIFE Picture Collection via Getty Images/Getty Images

So in order to match the energetic power of a hurricane, there would need to be almost 2,000 "Little Boys" dropped per hour as long as the hurricane remained a hurricane.

Even the largest nuke ever detonated — a 50-megaton hydrogen bomb known as Tsar Bomba, which the Russians detonated over the Arctic Sea in 1961 — wouldn't be enough.

What's more, the NOAA article says, once an explosive's initial high-pressure shock moves outward, the surrounding air pressure in the hurricane would return to the same low-pressure state it was in before. And the shock wave that a nuke produces travels faster than the speed of sound.

So unless we were able to detonate nuclear explosives in the eye of the hurricane on a continuous basis, we wouldn't be able to dissipate the low-pressure air that keeps the storm going.

Say, for example, that we wanted to downsize a Category 5 hurricane like Katrina (with winds around 175 mph) to a Category 2 storm (with winds around 100 mph). We would need to add more than half a billion tons of air to a hurricane with an eye 25 miles in diameter, the NOAA article says. A nuke couldn't do that.

"It's difficult to envision a practical way of moving that much air around," the authors wrote.

Plus, even a Category 2 hurricane can devastate property and infrastructure if it makes landfall.

Nuclear fallout would spread

The NOAA article also says that if we were to nuke a hurricane, radioactive fallout would spread far beyond the bounds of the hurricane.

"This approach neglects the problem that the released radioactive fallout would fairly quickly move with the tradewinds to affect land areas and cause devastating environmental problems," the authors wrote.

On July 13, the first hurricane of the 2019 season, Barry, made landfall as a Category 1 hurricane. NOAA

Fallout is a mixture of radioisotopes that rapidly decay and emit gamma radiation — an invisible yet highly energetic form of light. Exposure to too much of this radiation in a short time can damage the body's cells and its ability to fix itself — a condition called radiation sickness.

Land contaminated by fallout can become uninhabitable. After the Chernobyl nuclear power plant blew up in 1986 and spread toxic radiation into the air, people were forced to abandon a 1,500-square-mile area.

If the US were to attempt to disrupt a hurricane with a nuke, radioactive fallout could spread to island nations in the Caribbean or states bordering the Gulf of Mexico.

"Needless to say, this is not a good idea," the NOAA article concludes.

In the world of film, Disney is the reigning champ. That remains the case now, in 2019, years after memories of Mickey Mouse have faded from popular culture.

But in the world of video games, where Super Mario and Nintendo once held the crown, there's a new king: The Chinese conglomerate Tencent. Ever heard of 'em?

Whatever your answer, there's a good chance you've played a game that Tencent either wholly owns or owns a stake in, from "Fortnite" to "League of Legends" to "Call of Duty."

Here's how Tencent quietly became the biggest video game company in the world:

Ecosia, an eco-friendly rival to Google, saw a 1150% increase in daily downloads in one day for its search app and browser extension thanks to rising public concern around the blazes in the Amazon rainforest.

Ecosia looks like a normal search engine, but the company is a non-profit that donates 80% of the revenue it makes from search ads to planting trees.

The decade-old company hasn't built a search engine from scratch, but relies on a partnership with Microsoft's search engine Bing to power its search results and display ads.

The firm puts the bulk of its profits behind tree-planting projects in countries such as Brazil, Ethiopia, and Madagascar, and the company says it has planted 65 million trees to date.

Ecosia looks like a normal search engine, but donates profits from search ads to tree-planting projects. Shona Ghosh/Business Insider

Ecosia's installs spiked on Thursday 22 August, the company said, coinciding with an explosion in international media coverage of and social media outrage over the Amazon rainforest fires.

The company told Business Insider that it normally sees around 20,000 downloads of its app and browser extensions per day, on average.

That spiked to 250,000 on Thursday. The firm said if it continues that kind of install rate, it will have 1 million downloads in August alone.

Christian Kroll, Ecosia's chief executive, told Business Insider: "We had our team meeting and people were, on the one side, very happy because of the numbers but also very sad because of the forest fires. So it's both exciting and a tragic occurrence." Ecosia's team, he added, has a number of Brazilian staffers.

Ecosia works with tree-planting projects in Brazil. Ecosia

He said Ecosia became the top-ranked iOS app in Brazil on Thursday, and has ranked highly in a number of other markets globally.

Users voicing their concern on social media is partly responsible for the uptick in Ecosia's downloads. Business Insider found Instagram users encouraging their friends to download the app in response to the rainforest fires, and the app is prominently mentioned by users on Twitter alongside the #PrayforAmazonia hashtag.

Brazil's space research centre INPE has detected some 72,843 fires in the Amazon rainforest so far this year, up 83% from 2018. The fires have covered parts of the Amazon region, including major cities, in thick, black smoke. On Friday, French president Emmanuel Macron described the fires as an "international crisis."

Kroll founded Ecosia in 2009, after travelling in Nepal and South America and learning about ongoing devastation to the natural environment.

Originally a business student with an interest in tinkering with computers, he turned into an environmentalist. "I didn't really know about climate change, nor about many of the issues that are caused by globalization but after living there, I decided I wanted to do something that helps people," he said. "In my opinion, planting trees helps people and the environment at the same time."

SoftBank is one of the most high profile companies in tech, with its $100 billion Vision Fund - not to mention its recently-announced 'Vision Fund II' - aiming to revolutionize a constellation of different industries.

Yet despite SoftBank's renown, little is known about how it actually goes about striking deals.

One major recent SoftBank outlay was its mammoth $200 million investment in C2FO, an online marketplace for working capital that enables suppliers to be paid early at a discounted rate.

C2FO's pitch is to help businesses better control their cash flow and increase their access to working capital.

Suppliers that want to be paid early set a discount that they're willing to offer on their invoices. That offer is posted on C2FO's online marketplace, against all other offers out there. If the discount is accepted by a buyer, the supplier gets paid early.

The idea is a twist on invoice financing, and the upshot for the supplier is fast access to capital in a world where clients can drag their feet about paying up. C2FO estimates that around $40 trillion is tied up in accounts receivable and accounts payable globally.

Sandy Kemper, C2FO's founder and CEO, and Colin Sharp, the firm's senior vice president for the EMEA region, spoke to Business Insider about how the SoftBank deal played out.

'They were a little puzzled when we didn't pull out an investment deck'

Kemper's initial thought wasn't to raise funding, but to tap SoftBank's portfolio firms as potential customers. He was introduced to the investment giant by a friend.

"The idea was very much, initially, let's find a way to create more net profit and gross margin for the portfolio of companies of SoftBank's, so that the valuation of those companies goes up," Kemper said.

Both Sharp and Kemper attended the meeting, and kept it focused on doing business with SoftBank's portfolio firms. That includes larger firms like WeWork and Uber and startups such as gym membership startup Gympass and gaming tech firm Improbable.

Colin Sharp, SVP for the EMEA region at C2FO, was with Kemper during C2FO's first meeting with SoftBank. C2FO

"We weren't talking about raising money," added Kemper. "We happily didn't need to raise money. We were talking to them about ways we could go in partnership with them into their portfolio of companies. So that was the original introduction.

"We sat with the team, and they were a little puzzled when we didn't pull out an investment deck. We really weren't asking for money. We were just asking them to help us with revenue generation."

It was SoftBank who changed the tone.

"They then immediately said 'Well, we're going to help with revenue generation - we're going to darn sure have an investment in the company,'" Kemper said.

"[The process] was quite detailed and very thoughtful, but also very rapid. We moved faster with them than we moved with any of the other [investors we've had]."

C2FO's other backers include Abu Dhabi's wealth fund Mubadala, which also has ties to SoftBank; Tiger Global; and Temasek Holdings.

Kemper said the time between SoftBank's investment proposal and an agreement being reached was 'a matter of weeks'

Kemper said that everything was agreed by the end of June, with the investment publicly announced in early August. The whole process took place in weeks.

"We came to a very friendly term sheet that I think is somewhat typical for SoftBank from what I understand: very founder friendly; very focused on the potential of the company. They did it very quickly, even though there were mounds and mounds of details that we went through.

"To be in a position where we had a verbal [agreement] - a look in the eye and and handshake about what was going to get done - was truly a matter of weeks. Diligence then took place. We had to wait for certain regulatory approvals to get done. But we had an agreement on everything by the end of June.

"We went through [those details] with great intensity," he continued. "[SoftBank] were very fast; very responsive; very thoughtful. Frankly, they beat everyone else to the table with a very, very strong offer. I'm not saying that timing was everything, but the whole consideration - timing; thoughtfulness; vision; connection; portfolio - no-one else had all of those attributes."

Kemper says SoftBank was 'very fast; very responsive; very thoughtful' when proposing its investment. Koki Nagahama/Getty Images

EMEA VP Sharp added that the prestige SoftBank carries should help C2FO in the long run.

"The challenge for large corporates, who are our target audience is, is [deciding] which [fintechs] are actually going to survive over the long term," he said. "I think we're starting to see that now. I can't speak for SoftBank, but I can assume that they're the investor everyone wants to be associated with."

C2FO says that more than 300,000 businesses across 173 countries use its marketplace and receive more than $1 billion in funding every week.

Akshay Nehta, managing partner at the Vision Fund, told Bloomberg earlier this month: "Business models are going to get redefined in this macro environment that we're entering, and I don't think banks will be the leaders in that innovation."

Kemper added that, in the long term, C2FO aims not just to help vertical industries run more productively, but to help make entire economies more productive - a vision he said Masayoshi Son shares.

"The portfolio at SoftBank looked awfully good to us. I liked the team very much. Masa's got a great vision. His vision, at least for us, matches up very much with this idea of de-risking the availability and the proliferation of working capital for businesses all around the world.

"He's very focused on a world where we have more economic productivity, and I think he understands that the current financial system - for many businesses around the world - is a hindrance to that growth."

If you use your computer all the time, you need a laptop that's powerful, sleek, efficient, and lightweight. There are plenty of ultra-high-end laptops out there, and they're well worth considering if you have the cash to spend on the best new tech and you want a laptop that should last several years.

There are a number of things worth considering if you're in the market for a new laptop. For starters, you'll want to think about whether you want a Windows laptop or one that runs Apple's MacOS. MacOS is great for Apple users who want a laptop that will seamlessly integrate with other Apple products, while Windows is typically better for gamers.

You'll also want to think about internal components, like the processor, RAM, and storage. Last but not least, for many, the design of the laptop will be important — especially if you need a portable laptop that's perhaps smaller and lighter in weight.

Because there are so many high-end laptops, it can be a bit hard to figure out which model is right for your needs. That, however, is why we've put together this guide to the best high-end laptops that are worth your money.

The MacBook laptop lineup has long been considered the epitome of style and performance for many, thanks largely to that classic Apple design and the MacOS operating system.

But there are multiple MacBook models out there, so it can be difficult to find the exact model that's right for your needs. That, however, is why we've put together this comparison of the MacBook Pro and MacBook Air.

Specs: MacBook Pro vs. MacBook Air

The specs of the MacBook Air and MacBook Pro can vary a lot based on the configuration you choose. You can tweak the specs to better meet your needs. For example, you may want to get a more powerful processor or more storage. There are also two sizes for the MacBook Pro: 13 and 15 inches.

Here's a rundown of the specs for the MacBook Air and the MacBook Pro.

Alyssa Powell/Business Insider

As you can see, there's a major difference in specs between the MacBook Pro and MacBook Air. At first glance, the base model of the MacBook Air and Pro may look more or less the same, but it's important to note that a quad-core processor will offer significantly more performance than a dual-core one.

Once you start upgrading the MacBook Pro, you'll get a ton more power than the MacBook Air. That, however, doesn't necessarily mean that the MacBook Air is weak — it'll still offer plenty of performance for most tasks you throw at it from surfing the web and responding to emails to streaming video and doing light photo editing.

Another main difference between the two is the screen size options. You can only get a 13-inch Air, but the Pro comes in 13- and 15-inch sizes.

You can get the MacBook Pro with a discrete graphics card, much more RAM, more storage, and a slightly better screen. With the more powerful processors, the MacBook Pro is clearly a better option for those who need a laptop that can keep up with heavier multitasking and things like audio editing, video editing, or graphic design.

However, most people will likely be happy with what the Air offers.

Design: MacBook Pro vs. MacBook Air

Hollis Johnson/Business Insider

You'll immediately recognize a MacBook when you see one. It's hard to look past that metallic design and iconic Apple logo on the lid. That said, there are a few small differences between the design of the MacBook Air and MacBook Pro.

On paper, it may look like the MacBook Air is thicker than the Pro, but the Air has a tapered design, so it feels a lot thinner in the hand. The Air is also a quarter pound to a full pound lighter than the Pro models (depending on which screen size you choose), making it much more portable.

Another major difference is that the MacBook Pro has Apple's Touch Bar, which is essentially a long and thin touchscreen that replaces the row of function keys and allows you to control different features depending on the app that's open. Some people love the Touch Bar, but most won't need it.

Generally speaking, the MacBook Air, as the name suggests, is a little more portable and lightweight, while the MacBook Pro is a bit heavier and more focused on performance.

Daily use: MacBook Pro vs. MacBook Air

Day-to-day use of the MacBook Air and MacBook Pro is relatively similar. Both computers run on Apple's MacOS operating system, which is well-designed and relatively easy to use.

While Apple's keyboards have gotten a bad reputation over the past few years, we actually don't mind them. The keyboard experience on the MacBook Air and Pro is relatively similar: Both offer a low level of travel. That said, you'll get used to typing on the keyboard, and eventually, you might even like it — that's what happened to me on my MacBook Air.

It is important to note that some MacBook keyboards have become unresponsive or broken in recent years, so it is something to keep an eye on. Apple has a service program that was built to address keyboard problems, so if you do have a problem, they may fix it for you.

Other details represent minor differences. The MacBook Air and Pro both offer a 720p webcam, along with decent speakers. The speakers on the MacBook Pro are slightly better than the MacBook Air, but not by a lot — and for most, the quality of the MacBook Air will be more than good enough.

The bottom line: The 13-inch MacBook Pro is the best for most people

The MacBook Air and MacBook Pro may look similar, but there are some clear differences between the two. If you want ultimate portability and don't need a ton of performance, then the MacBook Air is the way to go.

If you want a blend of portability and performance, then the 13-inch MacBook Pro is probably your best bet. For those of you who need absolute performance, then we recommend the 15-inch MacBook Pro. We think the middle-of-the-road 13-inch MacBook Pro is likely the best option for most people.

Of course, it's also worth keeping in mind price. None of the MacBook models are necessarily cheap, but the MacBook Air is the cheapest of the bunch, while the 13-inch MacBook Pro comes in second, and the 15-inch MacBook Pro is the most expensive.

If you are a student, you can get Apple's Education Discount, though, and the MacBooks frequently go on sale, so you may be able to get a lower price.

Buy a MacBook Air at Best Buy for $899.99 and up (originally $1,099.99) or buy directly from Apple for $1,099 and up

Buy a MacBook Pro at Best Buy starting at $1,099.99 (originally $1,299.99) or buy directly from Apple for $1,299

Shop all MacBook models at Best Buy

Amazon sells hundreds of millions of items on its online marketplace. With such a massive quantity of products, the question becomes: How does the company regulate what's being sold?

The Wall Street Journal published an investigation on Friday into Amazon's "struggle to police its site." The Journal found over 4,000 items being sold on Amazon that the publication says were labeled deceptively, determined to be unsafe by federal agencies, or banned by federal regulators. Those items included: a children's toy xylophone with four times the lead allowed by the federal government, knockoff magnetic children's toys that can lead to internal damage if ingested, and a motorcycle helmet that was falsely listed as US Department of Transportation-certified.

Read more: Amazon was caught selling thousands of items that have been declared unsafe by federal agencies

"The challenge for Amazon is that what built the marketplace — it being so open and welcoming to new sellers — has also meant that today Amazon is really having a hard time enforcing many of its own rules, because it just physically cannot allocate enough human power to police many of these rules," Juozas Kaziukenas, an e-commerce analyst, told the Journal.

That issue is mirrored at tech giants like YouTube, Twitter, and Facebook. These enormous, open tech platforms have struggled to weed through reams of problematic content, from Facebook posts calling for the genocide of the Rohingya minority Muslim group in Myanmar to YouTube videos calling survivors of mass shootings at US schools "crisis actors."

Here are the issues tech giants like Amazon, YouTube, Facebook, and Twitter are facing, and how they're attempting to regulate their platforms.

On the surface, driving for Uber and Lyft is relatively simple: just pick someone up and take them to their destination.

But for full-time drivers on the ride-hailing platforms, there's plenty more work that goes into making sure they keep a top-notch rating — and that they can entice as many tips as possible.

We asked drivers for the most difficult part of their job. Despite the flexibility that working for Uber and Lyft can offer, many said sitting for long hours can get uncomfortable, as well as a lack of coworkers to socialize with. On top of that, the most lucrative times to drive aren't always the most convenient.

Here's what they said (last names have been removed for privacy):

Jake Sandt is like any normal college kid in Missouri — going to class, eating at Panera, and maintaining an active presence on social media. But the 18-year-old stands apart from his peers with his successful YouTube channel JakeyonceTV, where he primarily makes videos recapping and "spilling tea" about the hit drag queen reality TV show "RuPaul's Drag Race."

Sandt's channel, which now has over 63,000 subscribers and more than 19,200,000 views, brought in enough money to support his pursuit of a college degree in journalism and buy occasional gifts for his family, he told Insider. But then the rare college financial security Sandt had created for himself through YouTube came crashing down in an instant.

Sandt, like many creators in recent months, found himself demonetized without warning, unable to continue to bring in the income he relied on from the content machine he had built. But Sandt wasn't dodging YouTube's rules or terms of service — he, along with others, was mistakenly demonetized for weeks with no option to recover lost profits.

YouTubers' lives are being disrupted without warning, and there's little they can do to reach the company

Jake Sandt (left) and "Drag Race" queen Naomi Smalls (right). YouTube/JakeyonceTV

Sandt first learned that his channel was demonetized through an email.

"My heart dropped," he said.

According to Sandt, YouTube claimed that he was in violation of their policy that forbade re-using content already on their platform. The platform still kept his videos publicly listed on the site, despite the content regulations it claimed Sandt had violated. YouTube just took away his ability to make money off of them.

Read more: Assassination, lawsuits, and devotional ringtones: How T-Series became the world's biggest YouTube channel and exploded PewDiePie's lead

Sandt, who often includes modified clips of "Drag Race" and other online shows in his commentary videos, says that all of his content is transformative and falls under Fair Use allowances under US law, but Sandt was given no option to appeal the decision issued by YouTube.

Unlike the three-strikes copyright system used to patrol copyright violations on the platform, YouTube's monetization system issued no warnings before suspending creators for 30 days before they could re-apply, stripping them of their ability to make money on the platform for a substantial period of time.

For Jake, the decision was near-catastrophic for his finances. "It changed everything," he said. "I felt like I had to hang onto everything — I wasn't going places, I wasn't really buying, my parents were helping me out a lot."

Other creators had similar experiences.

Alex Beckham, the creator behind "Man on the Internet," a channel that puts lyrics to video game music, said he similarly was demonetized without warning. "It just kind of happened," he said. "I got emailed saying, 'Hey, you can't live stream anymore,' And 20 minutes later another email came to explain that 'Oh yeah, we took away monetization because of reused content.'"

"That was a very stressful day where I didn't get very good sleep," Beckham recalled. "I was thinking 'Oh God, oh God, how am I going to pay the people who work with me on all these videos.' I'm not really a lone wolf, I've got a big cast and crew."

Creators were left screaming into YouTube's void

Whenever 78-year-old YouTuber David Hoffman appears onscreen in his videos, he usually uses this backdrop, which is in his home. Hoffman was demonetized for nine weeks before YouTube realized it had mistakenly barred him from receiving AdSense profits, which make up a third of his income. David Hoffman

David Hoffman, a 78-year-old YouTuber, repurposes content from his decades-long film career into YouTube videos that make up a third of his income. Like Sandt and Beckham, Hoffman was demonetized for what one email from YouTube Support called "duplication." He wrote physical letters, made calls, and emailed the company's support team repeatedly.

"I understand that you wanted to know more why your monetization on your channel has been disabled," a member of YouTube's Support Team wrote to Hoffman in an email. "Unfortunately, we cannot provide you specific details on what guideline your content has violated and also, we're not able to provide you where your channel does not comply with YouTube's YouTube Partner Program terms."

Read more: When a gaming YouTuber found a gun while scuba diving, he decided to completely change his type of videos. Now he has 8.7 million subscribers.

Despite the live person on the other end of the support team telling Hoffman he wasn't eligible for YouTube's Partner Program anymore, the entire decision was deemed to be a mistake over two months later, and Hoffman was finally monetized again without ever receiving any explanation.

"I was depressed," Hoffman told Insider. "I didn't feel like doing it anymore. I felt that the enormous power of the network just came down on my head without any warning and with no recourse. Almost like you've been fired from your job and you've been removed from your office and you have no idea why and you can never talk to anybody."

Many YouTubers have felt that their only option to challenge demonetization is to go public with the problem

A still from Man on the Internet's "Undertale the Musical," which has over 10 million views on YouTube. Screenshot/YouTube/Man on the Internet

Sandt and Beckham also found communications with YouTube around their demonetization to be confusing and opaque — leading both to turn to public cries for help.

"The only way to get any answer out of them is to go public about it, otherwise they don't respond," said Sandt, who spoke publicly about the incident on Instagram Live, YouTube, and Twitter, where he tagged @TeamYouTube — YouTube's paradoxical primary method of communication with aggrieved creators.

YouTube's only response was to point Sandt in the direction of the page that explained the decision.

Nearly three weeks later, YouTube tweeted at Sandt that the demonetization was a mistake.

Beckham similarly made a video explaining his situation and posted it on Twitter, also mentioning @TeamYouTube and emailing them. He was remonetized within 24 hours.

His high-profile tactics worked. "I don't recall any other time that monetization has gotten back that fast for a channel," Beckham said.

"I was expecting to batten down the hatches for a war of attrition with YouTube," Beckham, who has almost 280,000 subscribers, told Insider. He estimates he lost between $150 and $200 during his short suspension.

YouTubers haven't been given an option to recover money lost by mistaken demonetization

Despite the slew of mishaps caused by Google and YouTube, creators haven't been given an option to recover lost funds.

A YouTube representative told Insider the company won't reimburse creators for the money they lost during a mistaken period of demonetization because it can't calculate the amount of revenue the channels would have made.

In a step made to attempt to address its admitted mistakes, YouTube has launched a new pilot program that will allow creators to submit an appeal video internally, in response to demonetization decisions, explaining their "creative process" and what their channel entails. The platform says it will get back to them within seven days.

Before the pilot, there was no specific means of appealing the demonetization decision outside of re-applying in 30 days, making a fuss and tagging @TeamYouTube, or contacting YouTube's general support email. YouTube's new program seemingly attempts to move the appeals that were already happening on the platform publicly, to an internal process.

Read more: This 28-year-old makes $500,000 every month playing 'Fortnite' — here's how he does it

YouTube wouldn't specify whether it uses an algorithm at any point in the demonetization process, but emphasized that at some point in the cycle, humans review the flagged accounts. For Sandt, Beckham, and Hoffman, a live person reviewed each account and mistakenly determined that they had reused content without putting an original spin on it, a YouTube representative told Insider.

Whether the mistake was algorithmic or not, Sandt, who says he lost at least over $1,000 during his demonitized period, says that the experience taught him a valuable lesson — "do not rely on of AdSense. Do not." In the wake of demonetization, Sandt has made an effort to diversify his revenue streams, creating a Patreon where users can pay to access his videos early.

"It doesn't matter how big that check is, 'cause they can just take it away," Sandt said. "No matter how hard you've worked and no matter how great their system gets, you need to have backup plans, you need to have multiple platforms."

Mining is intense work.

For years, companies have relied on heavy machinery — almost all of which burns gas and diesel — to expose ore, minerals, and other materials from beneath the earth's surface and turn it into usable components.

One company, Kuhn Schweiz AG, has found a way to do at least part of that work completely emissions-free, together with researchers from the Bern University of Applied Sciences in Bern, Switzerland and the NTB Interstate University of Technology in Buchs, Switzerland.

Enter, the "eDumper" a 121-ton electric dump truck that can consume less energy than it produces in certain situations.

If you've ever wondered how professional gamers keep their mouse skills so sharp, I've found the game for you. "Osu!" is a free music game for computers, inspired by classic Nintendo DS series of rhythm games "Osu! Tatake! Ouedan!"

The gameplay of "Osu!" is simple — you tap a series of circles to the beat of the music, occasionally dragging a ball or rotating a spinner on the screen as well. The game has a ton of customization options and players can make "beat maps" to match their favorite songs and share them with each other online.

Professional gamers frequently use "Osu!" as a warm-up or practice before gaming, especially players who play shooting games like "Fortnite" or "Counter-Strike." For example, Tyler "Ninja" Blevins, the most well-known professional gamer in the world, recommends using "Osu!" in his new book "Get Good."

Read more: I read Ninja's new book on professional gaming — these are the 6 most important things I learned

Even if you're not looking to push your mouse skills to the limit, "Osu!" can still be an addictive pasttime thanks to a limitless library of songs online. To get started with "Osu!," you'll need to download the game first. You'll start with about 40 tracks with a range of difficulties, and can use the same site to search for more.

Here's how to get started with "Osu!"

The future of the headphone jack on smartphones is pretty certain at this stage: it's all but over.

Samsung, one of the last smartphone headphone jack holdouts, ditched the headphone jack for the new Galaxy Note 10, and that likely means the Galaxy S11 next year won't have a headphone jack, either.

Somewhat surprisingly, Samsung isn't easing its customers into the headphone jack-less world. The company isn't including headphone jack dongles with the Galaxy Note 10, forcing you instead to use a pair of wireless headphones, use the included USB-C AKG earphones, or buy a $15 dongle separately.

Speaking with Business Insider, Samsung said it would rather include earphones the company values at a $100 instead of a $15 dongle to connect your existing wired headphones.

That's a tough sell, but a sell nonetheless.

Read more: Bose announced a new $350 portable Bluetooth speaker with a handle that could be the last speaker you'd ever need

I tried the AKG earphones that came with the Note 10, and they're actually pretty good. If you don't already have a pair of earphones, they'd work perfectly fine as a daily pair. They have an in-ear design that's more likely to fit a wider range of ears than earbuds like Apple's EarPods that are included with iPhones. And as in-ear earphones, they help block out a little noise, too. When I forgot my wireless headphones one day, the AKG earphones that came with the Note 10 were a welcome and perfectly good backup.

But whether Note 10 users with their own wired headphones will accept the AKG earphones is another matter.

Since you probably use your phone for everything from watching Netflix to browsing Facebook and getting directions from point A to point B, it can be easy to breeze through your data plan unknowingly.

But there are a few steps you can take to better manage your data usage. One such trick is by turning of Wi-Fi Assist, a feature that automatically switches your iPhone to a cellular connection if you're on a sluggish Wi-Fi network. Apple added this feature to the iPhone when it launched iOS 9 in back in 2015 to make it easier to keep using the web and apps when Wi-Fi is slow.

Read more: The Apple Card just launched this week — here's how it stacks up against other similar credit cards

However, if you're really trying to cut back on data usage, you might not want your iPhone to automatically switch to cellular service without your knowledge.

Wi-Fi Assist is on by default. Here's how to turn it off.

The Tesla Model S has earned many accolades, from being labeled the best-selling car in Norway in 2013 to being awarded MotorTrend's "Ultimate Car of the Year" award.

Unlike other mainstream car manufacturers that may significantly update their vehicles before a full redesign, Tesla has taken a different route, implementing small aesthetic and mechanical changes over the course of each vehicle's life cycle, while investing substantially more resources into over-the-air software updates that improve the vehicles internally.

Read more: Tesla rivals Jaguar I-Pace and Audi e-tron are struggling to compete — here's how the cars actually compare to the Model X

Tesla CEO Elon Musk announced on Twitter in July that the Model S would not be refreshed this year, and would — along with its SUV sibling the Model X — only receive incremental changes instead.

And since its introduction, the Model S has undergone many changes, including updates to its drive unit, as well as exterior and interior aesthetic modifications.

Here is a timeline of some major changes the popular electric luxury sedan has undergone since its introduction, both in its aesthetics and in its programming and driving features.