Marvel Cinematic Universe fans freaked out on Tuesday after news broke that Sony and Disney's Spider-Man deal was in danger.

Deadline reported that the two companies were unable to come to an agreement over the character's on-screen future. Disney wanted a better deal, Sony wouldn't budge, and now Marvel Studios and president Kevin Feige will not be involved in future "Spider-Man" movies unless something drastically changes.

Sony said it was Disney's decision in a statement late Tuesday, as Feige's "many new responsibilities do not allow time for him to work on IP they do not own."

READ MORE: Spider-Man's movie adventures have been a headache for Sony for over a decade, but the character is too valuable to compromise on

Hashtags like #SaveSpidey and #SaveSpiderManFromSony were trending on Wednesday. The concern from fans was expected.

Sony botched its "Amazing Spider-Man" reboot not that long ago and the character has enjoyed a nice revival since actor Tom Holland's portrayal debuted in 2016's "Captain America: Civil War." Since then, he's starred in two solo movies — "Spider-Man: Homecoming" and "Spider-Man: Far From Home" — that have grossed nearly $2 billion combined as part of a deal between Sony and Marvel Studios.

But "Spider-Man" movies have been successful outside of the Marvel Cinematic Universe, too.

They were successful long before the MCU existed and Sony's own movies since the deal was made — "Venom" and "Spider-Man: Into the Spider-Verse," which Marvel was not explicitly involved in — have been hits, too. "Venom" made over $800 million worldwide and "Into the Spider-Verse" won the Oscar for best animated feature earlier this year.

Tom Holland as Peter Parker, with Tony Stark's glasses, in "Spider-Man: Far From Home." Sony

Deadline reported that Sony is still hoping that Holland and "Far From Home" director Jon Watts return for two more movies. If they do, and a deal with Disney isn't made between now and then, the movies wouldn't include any MCU characters.

It's natural that this could cause some frustration with fans who have come to admire this iteration of Spider-Man, but with the same cast and same director, those movies could maintain a high quality without Marvel Studios' involvement. Obviously Feige's touch, and the Marvel Studios brand, was a huge factor in the movies' popularity. But it wasn't all Feige. Former Sony executive and longtime "Spider-Man" producer Amy Pascal also produced "Homecoming" and "Far From Home."

From a story standpoint, it would give Holland's Peter Parker an opportunity to definitively step out of Tony Stark's shadow and finally grow up.

READ MORE: Sony blamed Disney for the 'Spider-Man' deal falling apart and said it hoped 'this might change in the future'

The initial deal between Sony and Disney was that Sony retained distribution and creative rights over Spider-Man while the character could appear in the Marvel Cinematic Universe. Marvel received up to 5% of first-dollar gross from the movies and all merchandising revenue. Disney recently asked for a 50/50 cofinancing stake in future movies and that's when the deal imploded.

Spider-Man is simply too valuable an asset for Sony to compromise on, and it makes sense that the studio would want to maximize its control over its biggest film property.

Sony has owned the film rights to Spider-Man and 900 related characters since 1998 and can keep them as long as it releases a "Spider-Man" movie every five years. The success of "Venom" and "Spider-Man: Into the Spider-Verse" clearly gave it extra confidence that it could carry on the Spider-Man movies without Disney and Marvel Studios.

Sony said in its statement that it hoped things could change in the future, implying that there could still be hope for a deal with Disney. But if not, Spider-Man's future on the big screen isn't dead. Far from it.

Y Combinator's Demo Day, which actually spans two full days in a massive warehouse in San Francisco, is a see-and-be-seen type of event straight out of an HBO parody show. The men's restroom line surpasses the women's. A flock of electric scooters flanks the entrance. Puffy vests outnumber traditional business attire. And everyone has a backpack with an impressive name stitched on the back.

But for all the amusing clichés of the ambiance, the bi-annual event still delivers an impressive display of fresh ideas and hungry startups. On Monday and Tuesday, an ambitious group of entrepreneurs took to the stage to pitch hundreds of investors on their early-stage companies.

Rahil Sondhi was among the almost 200 companies that presented over the two-day event. His company PopSQL, pronounced "popsicle," is a database collaboration and communication tool built on the database language SQL. Sondhi has been running the startup completely on his own since founding it two years ago.

Before stepping on to the stage, he told Business Insider he had already raised $1 million in venture funding. PopSQL already has more than 100 customers, Sondhi said. He's eager to bring in employees so he can pursue fundraising for the remainder of his seed round while simultaneously building new products and features.

"I need people to take anything off my plate," Sondhi said. "If a strong engineer comes on board, awesome. A strong designer comes on board, perfect. A marketer, content marketing is really important for us. What else? Sales. Really anything, I need help in all departments."

Born on the fourth of July

Sondhi began building PopSQL while he was working as a software engineer at the grocery delivery startup Instacart in October 2016. He said he would work on his side project for almost 35 hours a week in addition to his full-time role. PopSQL launched on Product Hunt, a popular forum for startups, in May 2017, and Sondhi was off to the races.

"I stayed in the July 4th weekend writing the code for the billing system and shipping it. We got our first customer on July 4th," Sondhi said. "I still have that email and they're still a paying customer and I think it was $32 or something, but it was so meaningful. Imagine waking up on July 4th to that after 10 months of work."

Now, Sondhi says PopSQL has over 100 customers, including his previous employer, Instacart, as well as food delivery startup DoorDash, and security startup Auth0.

Read More: Startup founders need to distance themselves from big tech, according to the CEO of famed startup accelerator Y Combinator

"If you take the SQL editors that have existed, they're just very legacy, they're heavy weighed, they're clunky, they have outdated UIs," Sondhi told Business Insider. "And then imagine somebody gives you Chrome for the first time or somebody gives you Google Docs for the first time. It's fast. It's lightweight, it looks good, it just has the right amount of buttons, it's intuitive."

Building a team that can work from anywhere

For the last three months in the Y Combinator program, Sondhi said he's been chipping away at growing the company instead of building new features.

Unlike past Y Combinator alumni companies, Sondhi isn't counting on building the company and hiring a team in San Francisco, although that's home for him. Between skyrocketing costs and an incredibly tight labor market, the Toronto native is "completely open" to building a distributed team from the beginning.

"The tools exist, it's just the culture and the willingness to do it," Sondhi said of building his team.

It's a philosophy being embraced by a growing number of tech entrepreneurs, including Reddit founder Alexis Ohanian, who recently said that "no one in their right mind" would build a company entirely in San Francisco these days. Ohanian, who now leads VC firm Initialized Capital, has employees based all over the US.

But even if he assembles a dispersed team, PopSQL's Sondhi isn't planning to move back to his native Toronto anytime soon. "I loved Toronto but San Francisco's become home. Once you get rid of winter, you can't take it back."

Tesla unveiled the production Model X SUV in the shadows of its Fremont, California, factory on September 29, 2015.

A few hours before the festive event where the Tesla faithful convened to hear their almighty leader preach the gospel of Falcon Wing doors and Bio-Weapon Defense Mode, I became one of the first people to drive the Model X.

Since then, Tesla's crossover SUV has become a benchmark in the industry. As a large premium electric crossover SUV, it inhabits a segment with only a handful of rivals like the Audi e-tron and the Jaguar I-Pace.

A few years had passed since I most recently drove the Model X. So I figured a road trip from northern New Jersey to Wilmington, Delaware, would be a good opportunity to check out a new Model X Performance and get reacquainted with the Tesla SUV.

In addition, the 120-mile drive would finally give me the opportunity to try out Tesla's vaunted Supercharger network.

Though I've spent plenty of time behind the wheel of Tesla's Model S and Model 3, they've generally been drives near Business Insider's headquarters in New York. That means I usually never burn off enough range to require a recharge.

For our road trip, Tesla provided us with a fully loaded Deep Blue Metallic Model X Performance that costs a hefty $163,250. The Tesla Model X Long Range starts at a more affordable $75,315.

Here's a closer look at our road trip with the Tesla Model X Performance.

Visit Business Insider's homepage for more stories »

This was a close one, but the Honda Accord takes it by a hair.

Both are strong contenders with virtually identical levels of refinement, ride quality, comfort, interior ergonomics, cabin space, and even fuel economy. Interior fit and finish as well as build quality are tied too.

The Camry's silky smooth V6 and trick camera system impressed us greatly. And while beauty may be in the eye of the beholder, we certainly found the Toyota to be the more aesthetically pleasing of the pair.

For us, the Accord won in two major departments: driving dynamics and infotainment.

Though the Accord's 2.0-liter turbo four and the Camry's 3.5-liter V6 return similar performance stats, they go about their business in very different manners.

And the Accord is the more exciting of the two — certainly the case with our six-speed manual-equipped test car.

The 2.0-liter, 252-horsepower turbo four is a pint-sized powerhouse. It's as gutsy as they come, and it loves to be pushed. The higher the revs, the sweeter the tune it sings.

The Accord simply felt more comfortable and eager to please at high speeds. The Camry was certainly capable of delivering when the driving got spirited, but it never truly felt at home.

And then there's the Accord's new touchscreen infotainment system. For the first time, a Japanese automaker has stepped up to the plate with a system capable of going toe to toe with its rivals from Germany and the US.

This is a major letdown for the Camry and other Toyota products we have tested in recent years. In an age when infotainment is growing in prominence, a great, user-friendly system in a must-have these days, and Toyota's just isn't good enough.

Which brings us to our verdict.

"It's fun, yet sensible. It's a high-tech car, yet approachable. It's lighter and smaller, yet roomier," I said in my review of the Accord. "It's a great car. This is really Honda at its finest."

And for that, it's our winner.

On Monday morning, President Donald Trump tweeted that a "report just out" showed that Google "manipulated" millions of votes in favor of Hillary Clinton in the 2016 election.

"Google should be sued," the president declared in his tweet, which said that Google manipulated between 2.6 million and 16 million votes in Clinton's favor. "My victory was even bigger than thought!"

President Trump, who received 2.9 million fewer votes than Clinton in the 2016 election despite winning the Electoral College, did not link to or explicitly cite the report. His tweet immediately sent surprised industry observers scrambling to find the blockbuster research report they had somehow missed.

It turns out, the report Trump appears to have been referring to was a 2017 report by a San Diego psychologist with a history of feuding with Google. The report, which one expert on the US election process characterized to Business Insider as having a "weird" methodology and lots of "red flags," was based on 95 participants.

So what is this report?

One of the figures Trump cited in his tweet (2.6 million votes) tied his comments to the recent testimony of San Diego psychologist Robert Epstein, who appeared before a Senate Judiciary Committee hearing in July entitled, "Google and Censorship through Search Engines."

In his testimony, Epstein — a self-proclaimed Democrat — said that at a "rock bottom minimum" Google swayed 2.6 million votes in favor of Hillary Clinton because of biases present in its search results.

"The range is between 2.6 and 10.4 million votes depending on how aggressively they were in using the techniques that I've been studying now for six-and-a-half years," Epstein told the committee. (It's not clear where Trump arrived at the 16 million votes figure, at the high end of his range).

But Epstein told CNN on Monday that President Trump misrepresented his findings, saying that he didn't have evidence to prove Google actively "manipulated" millions of voters, but rather the bias he found in its search results was "sufficient to have shifted between 2.6 and 10.4 million votes" to Clinton.

Epstein, a former Editor-in-Chief of Psychology Today, is Senior Research Psychologist at American Institute for Behavioral Research and Technology, a non-profit California group that promotes and conducts research that has the potential to "increase the well-being and functioning of people worldwide."

C-Span

In 2012, Epstein had a public spat with Google, after the search engine warned users that his website had been infected by malware. Epstein also is quoted about Google's supposed search manipulation in a series of 2016 articles on sites such as RT and Sputniknews.com that claimed the search engine was hiding information about Hilary Clinton's health problems.

Just how Epstein got to his "rock bottom" number of how many votes were swayed due to the alleged Google bias is being questioned by law experts.

What's the evidence Google "manipulated" 2.6 million votes for Clinton?

Epstein's findings are based on a phenomenon he says he's been studying for more than six years. He calls it the "Search Engine Manipulation Effect."

The crux of the theory, as he explained it in the 2016 sputniknews article, is simple: "All Google has to do is show people search results that favor one candidate, in this case Hillary Clinton, higher in search results."

In other words, the higher positive information about one candidate shows up in search results, the more likely voters will be to favor that candidate.

How Google ranks its search results is a black box. The algorithms Google uses to decide which websites are most relevant are considered one of its crown jewels. And while Google provides guidance on how websites can improve their search rankings, it keeps the specific criteria a secret to prevent the system from being gamed.

The lack of transparency by Google has caused a lot of suspicion over the years, with competitors such as Yelp arguing that the search engine does not give everyone equal treatment. And in 2017 the European Union fined Google $2.9 billion for demoting rival comparison shopping sites in its search results. More recently, conservative commentators have charged that Google is deliberately suppressing them from its results — a claim that has so far not been proven.

The 2.6 million Hillary Clinton vote number appears to have originally turned up in a 2017 study co-authored by Epstein, which aimed at finding whether Google introduced bias in search results in the lead up to the 2016 presidential election and whether those results had an impact on the election itself.

The study — which was based on 95 participants in 24 US states — stated, in part, that when extrapolating from a 2015 study also authored by Epstein, at least 2.6 million votes might be "shifted" in favor of Clinton due to bias in Google's search results.

But the 2015 study's findings were based on asking US residents to cast hypothetical votes for candidates in Australia's 2010 prime ministerial election based on information they saw in Google search results.

Google

Dr. Michael McDonald, an Associate Professor of Political Science at University of Florida, told Business Insider that he didn't necessarily believe Epstein's 2015 findings regarding Google's search rankings influencing American decisions about elections in Australia — a topic most Americans study participants would have little information about beforehand — could be applied directly to the US presidential elections.

"I'm not sure if this really apples to US elections where we have partisan politics going on and lots of other information that people have," Dr. McDonald said. "You don't need to look at the top of Google search results for your information about how you're going to cast your vote for president."

"That's something that sets off a bunch of red flags."

Justin Levitt, an Associate Dean for Research and professor at Loyola Law School who focuses on constitutional law and the law of democracy, told Business Insider that there are multiple points of contention with Epstein's 2017 findings, which have become the basis for the president's contentious tweet on Monday.

For one, Epstein writes in his report that after the study was completed, results from participants using Google's email service, Gmail, were discarded, thus changing the number of eligible participants to a lower, undisclosed number.

Epstein said Gmail users were removed because some of their search queries appeared "automated" and overall, those using Google's email service saw results that were far less biased than non-Gmail users.

"That's a weird methodological choice to take some of your results and throw them out after you've done the experiment because they seem to not fit your designed story," Levitt said. "That's something that sets off a bunch of red flags."

In his study, Epstein writes that the decisions to discard Gmail-using participants came, in part, to the possibility that Google itself had identified the study's "confidants through its gmail system and targeted them to receive unbiased results."

Another problem Levitt has with the study is Epstein's definition of the word "bias" itself. Levitt says that the mainstream media tends to be left-leaning and so finding more pro-Clinton results in 2016 might have been less Google bias and more a result of the media landscape.

What does Google say?

Google told Business Insider that Epstein's claims were "inaccurate" and said that his 2015 study, which found search rankings can easily influence undecided voters, had since been "debunked."

"This researcher's inaccurate claim has been debunked since it was made in 2016. As we stated then, we have never re-ranked or altered search results to manipulate political sentiment. Our goal is to always provide people with access to high quality, relevant information for their queries, without regard to political viewpoint," a Google spokesperson said.

Rick Pildes, a New York University Law Professor, told Business Insider that tech companies — including Google — indeed have the power to sway elections in major ways, but that doesn't necessarily mean search results have the potential to shift millions of votes, like Epstein's report claims.

"We absolutely have to worry about the social media giants manipulating election-related information, whether intentionally or not," Pildes said. "But it's massively irresponsible to claim to know anything this specific and concrete about what information moved millions of voters to cast votes as they did."

Got a tip? Contact Nick Bastone via Signal or WhatsApp at +1 (209) 730-3387 using a non-work phone, email atThis email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it., Telegram at nickbastone, or Twitter DM at@nickbastone.

President Donald Trump indicated he would not construct a Trump Tower in Greenland after he reportedly expressed interested in buying the autonomous Denmark island.

"I promise not to do this to Greenland," Trump tweeted in a caption of an image with a golden Trump Tower.

Read more: Trump wants to buy Greenland. Only one-third of Americans would be willing to offer more than $12 for the island.

The meme circulated on social media after numerous reports suggested he was interested in purchasing the land, which is inhabited by roughly 56,000 people. The land is also home to the US's Thule Air Base, which conducts surveillance of the northern polar region.

The president's son Eric Trump shared the meme of a golden Trump Tower on Monday.

Trump discussed his interest in the purchase, which was first reported by The Wall Street Journal on Thursday. Trump described the possibility on Sunday as "strategically ... interesting," but added it was not on his list of priorities.

"It's just something we talking about," Trump told reporters. "Denmark essentially owns it. We're good allies with Denmark. We protected Denmark like we protect large portions of the world, so the concept came up."

"It's not No. 1 on the burner," Trump added.

Danish officials balked at the notion and described the idea as "absurd."

"Greenland is not for sale," Denmark Prime Minister Mette Frederiksen said, according to Bloomberg. "By the way, Greenland is not Danish. Greenland is Greenlandic."

"It must be an April Fool's Day joke," former Danish Prime Minister Lars Lokke Rasmussen said in a tweet. "But totally out of [season]!"

There are all kinds of strange ways to light up a cigarette, from blowtorches to magnifying glasses. But few people on Earth have ever used as bizarre or overkill a method as devised by a Cold War physicist: the explosion of a nuclear bomb.

On Sunday, a thread from Reddit's popular "r/TodayILearned" community mentioned the story of how the theoretical physicist Ted Taylor used the blinding flash of an atomic explosion to light a cigarette in 1952.

Records of "atomic cigarette lighter" events aren't exactly robust, but it appears Taylor was the first to come up with the idea. That's according to the author Richard L. Miller, whose 1999 book "Under the Cloud: The Decades of Nuclear Testing" chronicled the event in detail.

Taylor apparently lit his cigarette during Operation Tumbler-Snapper, which was a series of test blasts orchestrated by the US military at the Nevada Test Site. The operation happened in the throes of the Korean War — a conflict in which President Harry S. Truman considered dropping the bomb (again).

Read more: Hundreds of never-before-seen nuclear blast videos show terrifying explosions in the ocean and Nevada desert

Government officials code-named the test explosion or shot in question "George" because it was the seventh in a series (and "G" is the seventh letter of the alphabet). Its purpose wasn't to light up a smoke, of course: Military researchers placed a roughly 3,000-pound nuclear-bomb design, known as the Mark 5, atop a 30o-foot-tall tower to try out a new blast-triggering technology, according to the Nuclear Weapons Archive.

The day before the test shot, Taylor apparently found a spare parabolic (cup-shaped) mirror, according to Miller's book, and set it up in the facility's control building ahead of time. Taylor knew exactly where to place the mirror so that it'd gather light from the test explosion, which would release gobs of thermal energy, and focus it on a particular spot.

Next, Taylor hung a Pall Mall cigarette on a wire so that its tip would float directly in front of the focused light beam. The arrangement wasn't too different in principle from holding out a magnifying glass to concentrate sunlight on a piece of paper and light it on fire.

On June 1, 1952, Taylor and other weapons experts huddled into the bunkerlike control building near Area 3 of the Yucca Flats weapons test basin in Nevada. Then they set off the bomb.

"In a second or so the concentrated, focused light from the weapon ignited the tip of the cigarette. He had made the world's first atomic cigarette lighter," Miller wrote of Taylor's setup.

Taylor's nuclear-age antics likely did not stop with him.

Martin Pfeiffer, an anthropologist who researches humanity's relationship with nuclear weapons (and who frequently forces the release of documents related to the bomb) tweeted that a 1955 Department of Defense film appears to show the concept in action.

About 19 minutes into the half-hour movie, titled "Operation Teapot Military Effects Studies," a narrator describes how parabolic mirrors were used to concentrate the light-based energy from nuclear explosions on samples of ceramics.

In the clip, a person's hand holds the tip of a cigarette in a beam of focused light, causing it to smoke and ignite:

Although this looks like another cigarette being lit by a nuclear weapon, that's unlikely.

There's no blinding flash — a telltale effect of a nuclear explosion — and the length of time the light beam stays on-screen is far too long as well. The person being filmed probably just held out his cigarette for the videographer so as to demonstrate the concept of a parabolic mirror focusing would-be bomb energy.

Still, it's not hard to imagine the story of Taylor's feat spreading among his colleagues over many years and hundreds of above-ground US nuclear test shots. A few others probably tried it themselves.

In any case, Pfeiffer isn't enamored by such stunts.

"Lighting a cigarette with a nuclear weapon ... is at least in part an effort of domestication of nuclear weapons through a performance articulating it to a most quotidian act of cigarette lighting," he tweeted. "It is a form of patting the bomb."

That is to say: The act risks trivializing nuclear weapons, which can and have inflicted mass death and destruction. The 1945 US nuclear bombings of Hiroshima and Nagasaki in Japan, for example, led to approximately 150,000 casualties, and decades of suffering for many who survived the attacks.

Today, above-ground nuclear testing is mostly banned worldwide, since it can spread radioactive fallout, mess with electronics, be mistaken for an act of war, and more. But US-Russia relations have deteriorated to the point that each nation is racing to develop and test new nuclear armaments.

The Comprehensive Nuclear-Test-Ban Treaty, or CTBT, endeavors to ban nuclear explosions "by everyone, everywhere: on the Earth's surface, in the atmosphere, underwater, and underground." Russia has signed and ratified the treaty, but eight other nations have yet to complete both steps and bring it into effect.

The US signed on to the CTBT in 1996, but Congress has yet to ratify the nation's participation in the agreement. There are also nearly 15,000 nuclear weapons in existence today, which means the atomic-cigarette-lighter trick could, almost certainly for worse, be tried again.

States including North Carolina, Mississippi, Texas and others have met with top Justice Department officials in Washington last month to discuss a multi-state effort to investigate big tech companies for anti-trust violations, the Wall Street Journal reports, citing unnamed sources.

The multi-state effort may be announced as soon as next month, the Journal reports, and would represent the third major government investigation underway into some of the largest American tech companies.

The states involved are run by Attorney's General who are members of both political parties, Democrats and Republicans. Their investigations into companies like Alphabet's Google and Facebook would likely be done in coordination with investigations by the U.S. Justice Department.

Representatives from about a dozen states attended the meetings. Enlisting the help of the states in a bipartisan probe could help GOP officials defend against accusations that federal investigations into tech companies are politically motivated.

Last month, The Department of Justice said it had launched a broad probe into top "online platforms" for search, social media, and e-commerce. It didn't name, names but the wording left no doubt that the subjects included Alphabet, Facebook, Amazon, and Apple.

The Federal Trade Commission, which recently fined Facebook $5 billion for privacy violations, is carrying out an antitrust probe into Facebook. On Monday, FTC Chairman Joseph Simons, discussed the potential of breaking up Facebook's past acquisitions of companies like Instagram and WhatsApp, according to the Financial Times.

Simons told the FT that reversing those mergers could be more difficult because of Facebook's recent efforts to integrate the backend technology of the various products. But he noted that there might be "additional evidence" that Facebook used the acquisitions to "snuff out" competition.

Beyond investigations into big tech by the Trump Administration, Democratic candidates have also been calling for investigations and other regulation of big tech companies and new technologies. Elizabeth Warren has called for breaking up Amazon, Google, and Facebook. On Monday, Bernie Sanders also called for banning sales of facial recognition technology to law enforcement agencies.

A market-research firm working on behalf of Facebook is offering to pay journalists hundreds of dollars to privately share their thoughts about social media.

The market-research agency Luce Research has been emailing tech reporters and other "thought leaders" on behalf of the Silicon Valley tech giant and asking them to take part in interviews to discuss subjects such as security, content moderation, and "the integrity of information on social media" — and offering them $350 each in return.

Multiple Business Insider employees were contacted via email on Monday, including me, as well as at least one editor at The New York Times. In the email, Luce Research said it was reaching out to "key opinion formers in the US in order to capture the latest thinking on these issues."

Among the key topics the research firm said it was interested in discussing were:

The survey comes as Facebook's reputation has been badly bruised by a series of reports of privacy violations and the spread of misinformation on its platform. The outreach by Facebook shows how the company tries to stay acutely aware of public opinion about itself and some of the core issues affecting its business by engaging with influential figures in society. It also raises questions about the appropriateness of a company offering to pay cash to journalists who regularly report on it or edit news about it.

Several members of Business Insider's editorial team who are regularly involved in the news coverage of Facebook received a solicitation to participate in the survey. The New York Times editor Susan Fowler, who said on Twitter that she also received the email, edits opinion pieces relating to technology for the newspaper.

Luce Research said it would offer $350 in return for a 45 minute interview, "which can be donated to a charity, should you prefer."

In the email, it said: "We are working with the research consultancy firm, Republic, on an important research project for Facebook, exploring attitudes towards social media, the role that social media plays in today's society and the priorities that social media companies should be setting at the current time."

The Facebook spokesperson Bertie Thomson said Facebook didn't select any of the survey participants. "This is a long standing study seeking the point of view of a representative sample of thought leaders. This kind of survey is standard practice, as is payment or offering a charitable contribution for participants' time," she wrote in an emailed statement. "Facebook isn't involved in selecting the participants of this survey, precisely to avoid the kinds of issues you raise."

Other categories of "thought leaders" being surveyed include academics, entrepreneurs, business leaders, and advocacy organizations, she added.

Luce Research did not immediately respond to a request for comment.

Here's the full email Business Insider received:

Dear Rob Price,

I am contacting you from Luce Research, a market research agency that specializes in recruiting participants for research projects and opinion former studies worldwide.

We are working with the research consultancy firm, Republic, on an important research project for Facebook, exploring attitudes towards social media, the role that social media plays in today's society and the priorities that social media companies should be setting at the current time. In particular, we are interested in discussing:

As part of this research we are speaking to key opinion formers in the US in order to capture the latest thinking on these issues and, to this end, were very much hoping that you would consider taking part.

Facebook is enthusiastic to hear your thoughts and recommendations on these issues and have asked Republic to conduct this research in order to allow you to be completely open and honest in your feedback. The interview would last around 45 minutes and would be conducted over the telephone by a researcher from Republic or Luce at a time to suit you. As a gesture of thanks for your time and input we are offering $350, which can be donated to a charity, should you prefer.

Please note that the research is being conducted in strict accordance with the Market Research Society's code of conduct and the Data Protection Act, and all responses are therefore anonymous, confidential and non-attributable.

By agreeing to take part in this project and accepting compensation, you confirm that there are no professional or other restrictions on your participation in this research.

This is an exciting piece of research and we would be delighted to hear from you.

If you would like to participate and/or have questions about the research, please reply to this email or to [redacted] at [redacted] or by phone at [redacted].

Best wishes, and thanks in advance,

Todd Luce President, Luce Research

Do you work at Facebook? Got a tip? Contact this reporter via encrypted messaging app Signal at +1 (650) 636-6268 using a non-work phone, email at This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it., Telegram or WeChat at robaeprice, or Twitter DM at @robaeprice. (PR pitches by email only, please.) You can also contact Business Insider securely via SecureDrop.

Read more:

We got a closer look on Monday at Apple's upcoming show "The Morning Show," and eagle-eyed viewers have noticed something familiar about the show's logo: It's very similar to that of The Boring Co., Tesla CEO Elon Musk's tunneling and construction business.

Both logos feature a similar font, solid colors, and a filled-in letter "O." The Apple logo also stacks and positions its three words — "The Morning Show" — the same way as "The Boring Company."

Read more: Apple just dropped another trailer for its new show with Jennifer Aniston, Reese Witherspoon, and Steve Carell, and it's much more revealing than the first teaser.

The Verge wrote about the similarities between the two logos on Monday, but the Twitter user Brent, who describes himself on Twitter as a product designer based in New York, noticed the similarity a week ago, when Apple dropped its teaser trailer for the "The Morning Show" on August 12.

The Twitter user Jason Combs, a designer based in Atlanta, also drew the comparison later on August 12.

The Boring Co. declined to comment on the similar logos, and Apple did not respond to Business Insider's request for comment.

"The Morning Show" will debut exclusively on the Apple TV Plus streaming service this fall. The show is about a morning broadcast-news show set in the #MeToo era. The trailer shows a news anchor (Jennifer Aniston) announcing the departure of her former cohost (Steve Carell) amid "allegations," although it's not immediately clear what those allegations are. In the wake of Carell's character's departure, a newcomer anchor (Reese Witherspoon) is positioned to rise through the ranks.

REUTERS/Robert Galbraith

As Apple drifts away from its reliance on the iPhone to drive revenue, the smartphone maker's wearables operation looks to be stepping up to the plate. 

The company's wearables business is now the size of a Fortune 200 company on a trailing 12-month basis, according to a new UBS analysis. The segment accounted for more than $5.5 billion of Apple's $53 billion in net sales during the third quarter of 2019, growing 50% from the same period last year. 

Apple has also made significant push into services to diversify its business. Apple Music has continued to gain ground on music-streaming competitor Spotify, while Apple TV Plus — a Netflix-like streaming platform — and Apple Arcade — a subscription-based gaming service — are scheduled to launch in the fall. 

According to UBS, Apple's wearables segment contributed more material growth in the third quarter than its services business for the first time in company history. 

Apple executives touted "phenomenal demand" for AirPods in the third quarter, and UBS's analysts predict the product alone could generate $10 billion in revenue by 2021, close to double the sales the entire wearables segment posted last quarter.

The firm also predicts the Apple Watch will generate $20 billion in sales by 2021, which combined with the predicted $10 billion in AirPod sales, the total is roughly the revenue equivalent of selling 40 million additional iPhones, UBS said. 

UBS has a Buy rating on Apple with a $235 price target. 

Apple is up 33.9% year-to-date. 

Markets Insider

True wireless headphones are becoming increasingly popular, but the best models are often a little pricey. One of the best pairs you can buy is the Bose SoundSport Free earbuds, which typically cost $200, but for a limited time, the headphones are on sale for $179. The $20 discount makes these truly wireless earbuds a great choice.

The SoundSport Free true wireless headphones are built for sports, and as such, the earbuds have wings to help keep them tucked firmly in your ears. That said, the SoundSport Free are perfectly good options for day-to-day use too, so if you're looking for headphones for your commute or to use around the house, then these earbuds should do the job perfectly well.

Perhaps the best thing about the Bose SoundSport Free is their sound. In classic Bose fashion, these earbuds sound great. They offer a good degree of bass, a slightly scooped mid-range, and plenty of clarity and detail in the high-end. Sure, the earbuds probably aren't the best for audiophiles who want hi-fidelity sound, but for everyone else, they're a great option.

The headphones offer five hours of battery life on a single charge, which is pretty impressive for true wireless headphones. Many true wireless headphones come in at as little as three hours, which isn't great, but these Bose earbuds step things up. The SoundSport Free also have an IPX4 water-resistant rating so they won't get ruined by a little rain or sweat.

We don't know how long the deal will run, so if you're interested in a pair of Bose SoundSport Free earbuds, you'll want to act quickly.

Get the Bose SoundSport Free true wireless headphones $179 (originally $199) at Best Buy, Walmart, Amazon, and Bose [You save $20]

Esports is a burgeoning industry, and only a handful of people can truly call themselves veterans in the world of professional gaming.

Jonathan "Loda" Berg is the CEO of Alliance, a Swedish esports team sponsored by major companies like Twitch, Monster, and Razer. But before he was an executive, Loda was considered one of the world's best "Dota 2" players. In 2013, the same year Alliance was founded, Loda led the team to victory at The International, the annual "Dota 2" championship hosted by Valve Software, the game's developer.

Now six years later, Alliance has new roster of young players to competing for a $33 million prize pool at The International, with Loda as the coach. The tournament's prize pool is more than 10 times larger than it was when Loda won, and it's being hosted in Shanghai, China for the first time this year. The winning team will walk away with $15 million, but Alliance's progress in the tournament so far means it'll leave with at least $501,545 in prize money.

Read more: A $33 million esports tournament is now underway, and the prize pool could keep growing. Here's everything you need to know about 'The International'

Alliance has also added new players to compete in games like "Fortnite," "Super Smash Bros. Melee," "League of Legends," and "Call of Duty." Alliance general manager Kelly "kellymilkies" Ong has more than 10 years of experience in competitive gaming and helps manage logistics, social media, and other day-to-day matters for the rapidly-expanding team.

Business Insider spoke with Loda and Ong about what it takes to build and support an esports team, how professional gamers can transition to new jobs when their careers end, and what it takes to win on the biggest stage in competitive gaming.

Uber Eats is great for getting food from dozens of restaurants delivered right to your location, but there are plenty of reasons to cut ties with the service, too, the main one being that you're spending too much money.

The tricky thing about deleting your Uber Eats account is that you have to delete your primary Uber account as well. You can restore the account within 30 days and not lose your past credits and ride history, but after this 30-day deactivation period, the account is deleted permanently.

You might want to consider just not using Uber Eats anymore, perhaps by deleting the standalone Uber Eats app off your iPhone or Android phone, but keeping the main Uber app.

But if that's not good enough for you, here's how to delete your Uber account, including Uber Eats.

Check out the products mentioned in this article:

iPhone Xs (From $999.99 at Best Buy)

Google Pixel 3 (From $799.99 at Best Buy)

How to delete your Uber Eats account in the app

1. Open the app and tap the three bars in the top-left, then tap Settings in the menu that pops up.

2. Scroll down and tap Privacy, then tap "Delete Your Account."

Tap the "Delete Your Account" tab. Steven John/Business Insider

3. Enter your password when prompted, then follow the steps to delete your account.

How to delete your Uber Eats account on a computer

1. Navigate to this Uber account deletion page.

2. Enter your email or mobile when prompted, then enter your password.

Sign into your Uber account to delete it. Steven John/Business Insider

3. Follow the prompts to continue with account deletion.

And remember, you have 30 days to undo the deactivation before your account is fully deleted.

To undo deleting your Uber account, just launch the app on your phone and start using it as normal — as soon as you use it again, your account will be reactivated.

"Aquaman" actor Jason Momoa is giving the "Release the Snyder Cut" campaign a big boost.

Momoa posted a video to Instagram on Monday praising "Justice League" director Zack Snyder and revealing that he had seen Snyder's elusive director's cut of the DC Comics team-up movie, which has been the subject of a passionate movement for the studio Warner Bros. to release it.

"Well let's be honest if it wasn't for this man we wouldn't have Aquaman I love u Zachary synder," Momoa wrote in the video's caption. "Mahalo for showing me the synder cut."

Warner Bros. and DC did not respond to a request for comment.

"I wouldn't be here today, in my career, if it wasn't for him, because he made Aquaman," Momoa said in the video, Snyder by his side.

Snyder left "Justice League" late into production after a family tragedy, and "Avengers" director Joss Whedon stepped in for extensive reshoots. Fans of Snyder and his previous DC Extended Universe movies, "Man of Steel" and "Batman v Superman: Dawn of Justice," have advocated in various ways for Snyder's original vision to be released.

After Warner Bros. announced that Ann Sarnoff would be its new CEO, fans quickly pleaded on Twitter for her to take action. "Snyder Cut" enthusiasts are also planning a letter-writing campaign directed at Sarnoff.

Fans bombarded San Diego Comic-Con in July with "Release the Snyder Cut" advertisements. They raised over $26,000 through GoFundMe in order to do so, half of which will go to the American Foundation for Suicide Prevention. They're planning the same for next month's New York Comic-Con.

"Justice League" was a major misfire, receiving a 40% on Rotten Tomatoes and underperforming at the box office. Warner Bros.' DC Comics movies have rebounded since then, though, with "Aquaman" (which made over $1 billion worldwide) and "Shazam!," which was a critical hit. The next release, "Joker," is projected to be a box-office success, as well.

As we previously reported, WeWork founder Adam Neumann has not only locked up tight control of the company, now known as We, but he has also found myriad ways of extracting millions of dollars from it in stock, cash, loans, and other assets.

One of the most jaw-dropping transactions revealed in the company's S-1 paperwork filed last week is this: His company paid him millions to own its own name.

More specifically, in July, just before sharing its financials to the public as part of its initial-public-offering process, the company reorganized into what it calls an "UP-C" structure, which renamed the company "We."

When that happened, the newly named We paid Neumann's private company, called We Holdings LLC, $5.9 million worth of "partnership interests" to acquire the trademark of "We." The S-1 says the value of this trademark was "determined pursuant to a third-party appraisal."

However, the S-1 doesn't say why the board thought that Neumann's other company owned the trademark in the first place. After all, the name of his private company, We Holdings, was derived from the name of the original company, WeWork. And it's not an unrelated entity.

We Holdings acts as a holding company for the class B shares owned by Neumann and his cofounder, Miguel McKelvey.

Read more: Here's who gets rich if WeWork has a successful IPO

Those class B shares carry 20 votes per share over the main company, We. That's a high number of votes, even by Silicon Valley standards, where "super-voting" shares are typically 10 votes per share.

In Neumann's case, his shares have 20 times the voting power over all others. And it's worth pointing out that Neumann controls all the votes attached to virtually all the class B shares, even if he doesn't actually own the shares themselves, the S-1 says in various footnotes.

He also controls all the votes attached to the 20-votes-per-share class C shares, whether or not he owns those shares directly. They are controlled by another related company in this UP-C structure called "We Company Partnership," which, interestingly, also uses "We" in its name.

So it's not an exaggeration to say that a company controlled by Neumann paid another company controlled by Neumann $5.9 million to use the word "We," which is used by both of them and by others in their family of related companies.

New York University professor Scott Galloway wrote about this $5.9 million transaction in his analysis of the company, which he called "WeWTF." In it, he advised straight out: "Don't buy this stock."

Galloway wrote, "Adam also owned the rights to the 'We' trademark, which the firm decided they must own and paid the founder/CEO $5.9 million for the rights. The rights to a name nearly identical to the name of the firm where he's the founder/CEO and largest shareholder. YOU. CAN'T. MAKE. THIS. S---. UP."

We, the company, declined comment.

Are you a WeWork insider with insight to share? We want to hear it. This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it., DMs on Twitter @Julie188 or on Signal.

One of the biggest independent game studios in the world, Insomniac Games, is being purchased by Sony. Going forward, all of Insomniac's games will presumably be locked to Sony's PlayStation game consoles.

The studio is most well-known in recent years for the excellent 2018 game "Marvel's Spider-Man," which was exclusive to Sony's PlayStation 4 console. But Insomniac is also responsible for the long-running "Ratchet & Clank" games, as well as the "Resistance" first-person shooter franchise.

The deal price was not disclosed in the acquisition announcement.

The "Ratchet & Clank" series is one of the oldest PlayStation franchises. Insomniac Games

"We have enjoyed a strong collaborative partnership with the studio for many years, and are thrilled to officially welcome them to the Worldwide Studios family, " PlayStation leader Shawn Layden said in the announcement release. "The addition of Insomniac Games to Sony Interactive Entertainment Worldwide Studios reiterates our commitment to developing world class gaming experiences that can only be found on the PlayStation platform."

It's unclear what will happen to the one Xbox-exclusive game made by Insomniac, "Sunset Overdrive."

Insomniac founder and leader Ted Price took to the company's blog to reassure longtime fans.

"We're excited to put Insomniac in the best position to deliver fresh experiences for our fans for many years to come," Price said. "Our structure and approach will remain intact across both Burbank and Durham, NC studios, and we will continue to cultivate our unique culture."

Insomniac's next project has yet to be announced, but the studio is expected to be working on a sequel to 2018's "Spider-Man."

The former TikTok executive Stefan Heinrich Henriquez will be leading the international expansion of Cameo, the personalized-video-shoutout app.

Cameo, which was valued at $300 million in its latest funding round in July, sells video shoutouts from famous personalities, including Snoop Dogg, NFL running back James White, and Cody Ko, a YouTube influencer with 3 million YouTube subscribers.

An average Cameo is priced around $62, and the talent set their own prices for the messages they sell and keep 75% of the revenue. The app generates an average 10,000 cameos a week, the company said.

Henriquez will lead Cameo's marketing and growth abroad as the chief marketing officer and general manager of international. This is the first major hire the Cameo management team has made since it raised $50 million in series B funding last month (bringing it to a total of $65.2 million in funding).

This role follows Henriquez's previous position as head of global marketing at TikTok, the short-form-video app that has surged in popularity, especially among teens and Generation Z.

Cameo CEO Steven Galanis told Business Insider that Henriquez's international experience at TikTok was what drew Galanis to him.

"Having first launched TikTok in Latin America, when they were still called Musical.ly, and being a huge part of the rebrand from Musical.ly to TikTok, really made him a perfect fit for what we were doing," Galanis said.

Cameo recently launched in-app booking, and since then, users have paid for cameos in 11 different currencies, Galanis said. He also spoke about his goal to bring popular global talent, like Bollywood actors, K-Pop stars, and athletes, to the app.

"We expect the Cameo talent base to look like the world's population," he said. "In scale, we hope that our US business is dwarfed by our global business."

Focusing on global talent rather than adding, let's say, every American comedian, will also help Cameo fend off copycats around the world, he said.

"There needs to be one Cameo and that should be ours," Galanis said.