The US healthcare industry as it exists today is not sustainable. An aging patient population and rising burden of chronic disease have caused healthcare costs to skyrocket and left providers struggling to keep up with demand for care.

Business Insider Intelligence

Meanwhile, digital technologies in nearly every consumer experience outside of healthcare have raised patients' expectations for good service to be higher than ever.

One of the key mechanisms through which healthcare providers can finally evolve their outdated practices and exceed these expectations is wearable technology.

Presently, 33% of US consumers have adopted wearables, such as smartwatches and fitness trackers, to play a more active role in managing their health. In turn, insurers, providers, and employers are poised to become just as active leveraging these devices - and the data they capture - to abandon the traditional reimbursement model and improve patient outcomes with personalized, value-based care.

Adoption is going to keep climbing, as more than 80% of consumers are willing to wear tech that measures health data, according to Accenture — though they have reservations about who exactly should access it.

A new report from Business Insider Intelligence, Business Insider's premium research service, follows the growing adoption of wearables and breadth of functions they offer to outline how healthcare organizations and stakeholders can overcome this challenge and add greater value with wearable technology.

For insurers, providers, and employers, wearables present three distinct opportunities:

Want to Learn More?

The Wearables in US Healthcare Report details the current and future market landscape of wearables in the US healthcare sector. It explores the key drivers behind wearable usage by insurers, healthcare providers, and employers, and the opportunities wearables afford to each of these stakeholders.

By outlining a successful case study from each stakeholder, the report highlights best practices in implementing wearables to reduce healthcare claims, improve patient outcomes, and drive insurance cost savings, as well as how the evolution of the market will create new, untapped opportunities for businesses.

A startup that wants to reinvent the way we take care of seniors in America just raised hundreds of millions as it gears up to launch its new plans in 2019.

Devoted Health on Tuesday said that it had raised $300 million in a series B round led by Andreessen Horowitz, bringing its total funding to $369 million in funding. The company is based in Waltham, Massachusetts, but it'll initially offer Medicare Advantage plans in parts of Florida, starting next year. Devoted is the latest firm to enter Medicare Advantage, the private side of the government-funded Medicare program for seniors. It'll have to compete for customers immediately with big, entrenched rivals like Humana, UnitedHealth Group and soon-to-be-merged CVS Health and Aetna. UnitedHealth on Tuesday said that it covers 4.9 million Medicare Advantage members, 12 percent more than a year earlier. About 19 million people were covered by Medicare Advantage last year.

Oscar Health, known for its individual plans on the Affordable Care Act insurance exchanges, said in August that it plans to move into the Medicare Advantage market after raising $375 million from Alphabet. Clover Health, which was founded in 2014, has been offering insurance plans in four states, with plans to expand into three more in 2019 Devoted was founded in 2017 by brothers Ed and Todd Park. Prior to Devoted, Todd co-founded health IT company Athenahealth and served as chief technology officer of the US during the Obama administration. Ed, who serves as Devoted's CEO, was formerly chief technology officer and later chief operating officer at Athenahealth.The company's plans might look a bit different from traditional insurance in that Devoted plans to do more than pay for visits to doctors and hospitals. It's also hiring nurses and other employees aimed at keeping seniors healthier and out of the hospital.

Because health insurers are in charge of paying for healthcare, the companies tend to know what's going on with a particular patient: have they been in for a check-up, or have they had a recent trip to the emergency room? Knowing that, the insurer — in this case Devoted — can clue in the other parts of the system so that the primary care doctor knows when his or her patient has been in the hospital and can follow up with them, for example.

To do that however, the Devoted team had to build out its own technology to process claims as well as build out its networks of doctors that it can work with. The latest funding round is being used to build out the technology to help them do that.

"Now we can sprint," DJ Patil, Devoted's head of technology told Business Insider.

Medicare Advantage, the private version of the government health insurance program for the elderly and some disabled people, has been steadily growing. As of 2017, 33% of people on Medicare were in one of these plans. Individuals can typically choose to enroll in either Traditional Medicare or Medicare Advantage plans. Medicare Advantage works like private insurance does for those under 65. It's designed to allow people to shop around and choose among different plans, which may restrict which doctors and hospitals individuals can use. The US government in turn pays the insurers a certain amount for each person who is covered, creating an incentive for the insurer to try to keep that person healthy and out of the hospital. If the insurer does a good job of caring for its customer at a low cost, it can keep the extra funds as profits.

"Medicare Advantage is today the simplest way to align financial incentives across the various parties in the system," Venrock partner Bryan Roberts, who's an investor and board member at Devoted told Business Insider. "Therefore, you can drive better efficiency in the healthcare system."

Vijay Pande, a partner at Andreessen Horowitz, said a key reason his firm led Devoted's fundraising was because of the implications plans like Devoted's could have beyond Florida, and even beyond just Americans 65 and older.

"The future could look like Medicare Advantage for all," Pande said.

See also:

"Being able to put yourself in someone else's shoes is really important."

This is true of life in general, but it's especially true when you're asking your boss for a raise.

According to Libby Leffler, who is the vice president of membership at personal finance company SoFi as well as a former Googler and Facebook executive, the first thing to do when you're planning to petition your manager for a salary bump is to "consider where you're coming from and where they're coming from."

For example: Are they trying to manage an already-tight budget for the division? Are they under strict orders only to grant raises for knock-it-out-of-the-park performance? Once you understand their goals and constraints, you can adjust your pitch accordingly.

Leffler's advice recalls insights from Daniel Shapiro, founder and director of the Harvard International Negotiation Program, and author of "Negotiating the Nonnegotiable." Shapiro previously told Business Insider that it can be helpful to play the role of your boss while a friend or colleague plays you.

The idea is to think and feel how your boss might be thinking and feeling — and to then tailor your strategy so it really resonates with them.

Remember, too, Leffler said: You can negotiate for outcomes other than financial ones. "Compensation is whatever these things mean to you," Leffler said. It can be flexible hours, extra vacation time, equity, or bonus pay. Figure out what exactly you want (and what your boss might be most likely to concede).

Leffler's most important piece of wisdom? "Practice, practice, practice your pitch before walking in." She'd never advocate going in cold.

Leffler said, "You want to take all these steps in advance to really set yourself up for success."

Anne Wojcicki, the CEO and founder of popular Silicon Valley gene testing company 23andMe, doesn't feel like the company is currently offering what she called a "complete product."

That's because the current gene testing kit — which includes health screenings for some of the genes involved in Alzheimer's, Parkinson's, and breast cancer — does not include a test that looks at how you process medications including those for depression.

Those DNA tests, which assess genes involved in the break down of antidepressants in the body, are currently being offered by psychiatrists and Albertsons pharmacists in three major cities at a hefty price tag of $750. Just last month, another Silicon Valley genetics testing startup called Color Genomics began offering the test as part of its $250 kits.

And on Tuesday at a conference organized by Rock Health, one of Silicon Valley's premier health-tech funding groups, Wojcicki said she hoped her company could include that kind of test in its product lineup soon.

But many scientists feel the tests don't offer a clear benefit to people and in some cases are not worth the money. Among other issues, the tests may give conflicting results to the same patient for the same medication and don't tell providers which specific medication is best, according to experts.

Lydia Ramsey/Business Insider In the early days of 23andMe, the company included a test for depression medications in its lineup of health offerings, Wojcicki said. But in 2013, the Food and Drug Administration forced the company to stop selling those products and get federal approval on the grounds that the tests could be misinterpreted as health advice. The company was allowed to continue selling the genealogy component of its kit, which looks at ancestry.

Last year, the FDA gave the company the green light to again sell some of its health screenings. On the heels of that decision, 23andMe rolled out a limited selection of some of its original products. The most recent addition, unveiled in March, is a test for some of the genes involved in the risk of developing breast cancer, also known as BRCA genes.

Now, the company is only missing one of those original health products, Wojcicki said: a test for depression medications, also called pharmacogenomics.

"The only one we don't have back yet is pharmacogenomics. We used to have that and we'd like to have that one come back," Wojcicki said on Tuesday at a panel discussion at the Rock Health Summit in San Francisco.

"When we can bring pharmacogenomics back, then we have a complete product back," she said.

It remains to be seen how the company would roll out such a test. Because 23andMe sells its tests directly to people (they can be purchased online and at a selection of drug stores), it would need to get FDA approval before selling an additional health product. The test could be incorporated into the existing health lineup, which currently includes tests for Alzheimer's, Parkinson's, and breast cancer for $199, or it could be sold as a stand-alone test.

Color Genomics chose to incorporate its new pharmacogenomics product into its existing $250 test. Unlike 23andMe, which sells its services directly to consumers, Color requires people to order their tests through a medical provider. In addition, the company mandates talking with a professional genetics counselor and a clinical pharmacist to avoid potentially dangerous misinterpretations of the results.

Genomind and Assurex, the two companies who offer a standalone pharmacogenomics product, sell the test through psychiatrists and some pharmacists for $750.

Wojcicki did not provide further details on how much the test — should the company ultimately choose to offer it — would cost or when it would be available. A company representative also declined to offer Business Insider more information about the test. But Wojcicki said she saw the pharmacogenomics service as part of the company's overall mission to help empower customers with more data about themselves and prevent negative health outcomes when possible.

"I think one thing genetics can do is help prevent a lot of early deaths," Wojcicki said.

Former position at Google: Software developer

Why he left: Breisacher was one of about a dozen Googlers who left the company in April to protest Google's controversial collaboration in which it provides the US Department of Defense with artificial-intelligence technology.

After thousands of employees signed a petition, Google announced it would cease work on the project next year.

"This is obviously a big deal, and it's very encouraging, but this only happened after months and months of people signing petitions and [internal debate] and people quitting," Breisacher told Business Insider.

Breisacher said his decision to leave was also influenced by Google's sponsorship of a conservative political conference and its failure to act decisively after YouTube videos related to LGBT issues were flagged as inappropriate on the site.

"When I started, Google had a reputation as a pro-gay, pro-trans company," Breisacher, who is gay, told Business Insider. "I guess I'm disillusioned. I know that Google is a for-profit company and you shouldn't expect it to do things purely for the good of the world. But in the past, we would expect leaders to listen to the employees and to think carefully about issues and not to cross certain lines.

"Things have changed at Google."

Google is making fundamental changes to the way Android works inside Europe, thanks to a $5 billion fine imposed by the European Union earlier this year.

Here's a summary of the changes, because it's complicated:

Until these changes actually come into effect, it is hard to know precisely what the outcome for consumers will be, but here's a walkthrough of a few possible scenarios.

Android phones become more expensive inside Europe

The Samsung Note 9. Hollis Johnson/Business Insider

When the EU first hit Google with a fine, legal experts last year warned that Android phones might become pricier as a result.

To understand why Android phones might become pricier as a result of this fine, it's key to remember that search advertising is Google's primary moneymaker on desktop and mobile. And increasingly, mobile is becoming more important thanks to the fact we're all buried in our smartphones.

Android has remained free because Google, by demanding phone makers preinstall Google Search, has ensured it can keep making big money from search ads on mobile. Thanks to the EU, that near-guaranteed source of revenue is under threat and Google has had to come up with another way to ensure it can make money from Android.

Charging for Android itself doesn't make sense — it's in Google's interests to make the OS as widely available as possible. Cue licensing agreements for its more popular apps.

Phone manufacturers may realise that their customers still want out-of-the-box access to Google services such as Maps and Search, and accordingly cough up for the new licences. And those costs may be passed to consumers, who will suddenly see the price of Android phones rise.

But this is dependent on a few things. One is how many phone makers decide to license Google apps, rather than pre-install rival services. Another is that Google may effectively cancel out licensing payments by paying phone makers to place Search and Chrome prominently on their homescreens. It'll cost Google a little more money, but the guaranteed income from search ads may be worth it.

The Android ecosystem's fragmentation problem gets worse

Google's Pixel 3 is the company's answer to fragmentation frustrations. Hollis Johnson/Business Insider

When you buy an iPhone, you know exactly what you're getting. That's not such a guarantee when you're shopping around for Android phones, thanks to the fact that manufacturers control the timing of operating system updates.

Fragmentation is an ongoing headache for Google. This refers to the fact that lots of different phones run on different versions of Android. This is bad for app developers and for security. Fragmentation is why cool new apps tend to hit the iPhone before they get to Android.

The Developer Alliance, which has been on Google's side throughout its EU ordeal, wrote on Tuesday that the "specter of fragmentation is back." That's thanks to Google deciding to allow non-compatible Android forks as a result of the EU fine.

Android forks are popular, especially with people who crave the freedom to tinker with their phones. Non-compatible Android forks are locked out from Google services, so they're also popular with anti-corporate types. Amazon created an Android fork, FireOS, to run on its Fire Tablets and other hardware, but Google essentially froze that system out of smartphones. Unfortunately, forks also mean Android doesn't exactly look like a consistent experience.

According to the alliance: "There is a risk that diverging versions of Android will lead to devices where apps cost more to develop and may not work for all users. Google's efforts to limit fragmentation have led to a better platform for users, developers, and phone makers. The Developers Alliance hopes that clear labelling helps to reduce the potential for user confusion between compatible and incompatible Android devices."

Facebook's bad year seems to keep getting worse.

Brian Wieser doesn't expect it to improve anytime soon, and thinks that's a good reason to sell the company's stock.

"We continue to see these issues as representative of systemic problems impacting the company," Wieser, a financial analyst who covers Facebook for Pivotal Research Group, said in a research note on Wednesday. He continued: "We're not doubting they [can] be fixed, but the fact that problems keep emerging reinforces our view that the company is not as in control of its business as it needs to be."

Facebook has been pummeled by a seemingly endless string of fiascos, scandals, and public-relations nightmares this year. Just on Wednesday, the Wall Street Journal reported that Facebook has been spotty about taking down pages from fake veterans groups, while USA Today reported that Facebook was removing ads that mentioned African-Americans and other minority groups, citing them as "political," when the ads weren't actually promoting political causes or candidates.

Meanwhile, in the last week, Facebook acknowledged that a security breach was worse than it had disclosed before, at least in terms of the data that was compromised, noted Wieser. It was also hit with a claim that it knowingly defrauded advertisers about the amount of time users were spending watching videos on its site.

Investors should expect more to come, Wieser suggested in his note. Facebook simply hasn't put in place systems that might anticipate problems and correct them before they came to light or caused damage to the company or its users, he said.

"The underlying problem that we see is that the company has been so focused on growth at any cost that it has failed to sufficiently invest in [such] processes," he said.

Facebook's clean-up effort will come at a price

Facebook has started to try to clean up and better police its site. It's tweaked the way its News Feed works to emphasize posts from other users, rather than those from organizations. It's started to label political ads and force the backers of such ads to be identified. And it's in the process of doubling its team of content moderators to 20,000 people.

Those steps are likely going to come with significant costs for the company, Wieser said. Those costs will likely weigh down its future earnings, but still may not be the end of its misery.

"As problems are fixed, costs will rise, possibly faster than the company has anticipated (if only because the company is slow to acknowledge problems requiring fixing)," he said. "And then other problems with more material commercial consequences might still come to light."

But Facebook faces an even bigger threat than having to spend more money to clean up its messes, Wieser said. The growth in the digital advertising market is likely to slow, putting a crimp on it longer term prospects.

In his note, Wieser's reiterated his $131 price target for Facebook's stock. The company's shares closed regular trading Wednesday at $159.42, down 64 cents or 0.4%. The stock is down 10% in the year to date.

Now read:

The big difference between a mirrorless camera and a DSLR comes from how their image sensors and viewfinders work.

Image sensors are the chips inside cameras that capture the photograph by detecting and recording the light coming into the camera. Viewfinders, meanwhile, are the part of the camera that you look through to compose a shot; they typically include a small optical lens are are placed at the top of the camera.

DSLRs use a mirror system, which bounces the light coming through the main camera lens up to the viewfinder. When you press the shutter button, the camera flips the mirror out of the way and the image sensor is exposed to light. The advantage of the mirrors is that they allow you to see frame a shot precisely the way the image sensor will record it.

As their name suggests, mirrorless cameras don't have a mirror. Instead, their image sensors are continuously exposed to light. Because they lack mirrors, mirrorless systems tend to be significantly smaller than DSLRs.

Most digital cameras, such as point-and-shoot ones, are technically mirrorless, so they generally don't look like DSLRs. But many of the mirrorless cameras that have the latest advances perform, operate, and resemble DSLRs.

Anthony Levandowski, the engineer at the center of this year's corporate espionage trial between Waymo and Uber, has a history of bending the rules when it comes to self-driving cars, the New Yorker reports.

While working at Google's Project Chauffeur, the self-driving car program that would later evolve into Waymo, Levandowski allegedly modified the car's software so it could be taken on routes that were previously off-limits. After another employee became angry with Levandowski for altering the code, the two began to argue — which resulted in Levandowski taking the employee on a test run to prove his point, an executive told the New Yorker.

Levandowski caused an accident during that test run, a former Google executive told the New Yorker. Google's self-driving Toyota Prius allegedly blocked another car from merging onto the highway, which caused the other driver to swerve into the highway median. Levandowski allegedly then took control of the Prius and swerved to avoid contact with the vehicle, but the violent motion seriously injured the other employee's spine.

Even though Levandowski and Google's self-driving car appeared to have caused the accident, the pair allegedly drove off without checking to see if the other driver was okay, and the incident wasn't reported. Even after Google's self-driving Prius was involved with an accident, Levandowski defended his safety standards, and sent his coworkers an email with the subject line "Prius vs Camry" that contained a video of the accident.

In a statement to the New Yorker, Google said the accident was "an unfortunate single-car accident in which another car failed to yield to traffic," and said it was not responsible since the Prius didn't directly cause the other car to crash.

Indeed, former Google executives told the New Yorker that Levandowski was known for sometimes ignoring safety standards, and that Project Chauffeur cars were involved in more than a dozen accidents in its early years — three of which were allegedly serious. Waymo said it is not aware of which three 'serious' accidents the New Yorker is referencing, and said the company has reported all incidents since the 2014 California law was enacted. Waymo said the majority of reported incidents are minor collisions or bumps.

Before California enacted a new law in 2014, it wasn't required for Google to disclose any accidents caused by its self-driving cars, so long as the vehicle itself hadn't physically crashed in any way. The report indicates that this is how Google was able to avoid reporting the incidents.

A Waymo spokesperson offered the following statement: "The Google self-driving car project was founded with a mission to improve road safety, and that's the standard we hold ourselves to in everything we do. Over the past near-decade, we've carefully developed a comprehensive testing program that includes more than 10 million miles on public roads."

For his part, Levandowski seems to acknowledge that safety was not his top priority.

"If it is your job to advance technology, safety cannot be your No. 1 concern," Levandowski said in an interview with the New Yorker. "If it is, you'll never do anything. It's always safer to leave the car in the driveway. You'll never learn from a real mistake."

To read the whole New Yorker article, click here.

Artificial intelligence, according to Paul Daugherty, is overhyped, many of the expectations for it are unrealistic, and most companies and their workers are unprepared for it.

At the same time, he says, it's the biggest and most important trend in technology today, will likely remain so for the next 10 to 20 years, and will profoundly change businesses around the world.

"We call it the alpha trend," Daugherty told Business Insider in an interview this week. He continued: "I don't want to be accused of hyping it more, but it is a big deal in terms of its impact."

Daugherty is in a position to know. He's the chief technology and innovation officer at Accenture, the giant consulting firm that counts more than three fourths of the Fortune Global 500 as its customers. As such, Daugherty leads the firm's effort to help clients identify, embrace, and integrate critical new technologies.

Every year, he and his team put together a list of the top technology trends in business. At the top of the list right now — and likely for many years to come — is AI, he said.

AI is being adopted by companies in every kind of business — that's different than other tech

Carnival Cruise Lines is using AI and machine learning to better serve guests aboard its ships. Princess Cruise Lines AI is remarkable for lots of reasons, but among them is how it's being adopted and by whom, Daugherty said. With previous trends, such as e-commerce or mobile apps or the cloud, the technology tended to be adopted quickly by only a handful of companies or a smattering of industries or in only a few countries around the world, he said. The companies on the cutting edge of the mobile phone trend tended to be banking and financial services firms, for example, while retailers tended to be the first ones to adopt e-commerce.

What's changed with AI is just how rapidly and broadly companies and industries globally are adopting it and related technologies, such as machine learning and automation, Daugherty said. Accenture has never seen interest among its clients or business grow this quickly with any other technology trend, he said. And instead of the interest being focused on a particular industry, it ranges from everything from the retail segment to utilities, he said.

"What we're seeing with AI is very different. It's very broad, immediate adoption," he said. He continued: "It's the fastest growing technology trend we've ever seen."

But there are still some unrealistic expectations

Utility companies are using machine learning and AI to try to become more efficient and get the most out of their production and distribution facilities, he said. Banks are using such technologies to try to better and more easily flag suspect transactions.

Online clothing company Stitch Fix uses AI to help personalize clothes for its customers. Business Insider Online clothing seller Stitch Fix is using AI to try to better understand its customers fashion preferences and to better predict what clothes they'll want next, he noted. Meanwhile, Carnival Cruise Lines has put in place a system to track the activities customers take part in and the stops they visit to better tailor its offerings.

"It's remarkably broad in terms of the adoption and going global very quickly," Daugherty said. He continued: "You see companies looking at how to better optimize their assets and create new revenue streams."

To be sure, there are likely to be hitches and hiccups in the race to embrace AI. Many companies have unrealistic expectations of what the technology will be able to do for them, he said. And many of them are unprepared for the technology.

In a recent study where Accenture surveyed executives at some 1,500 organization, some 65% of those polled said their workforces weren't yet ready to work with AI and related technologies. But only 3% said their companies were investing in training their employees to use them.

"It's an area that most companies are behind on," Daugherty said, continuing, it's "a striking disconnect."

Now read:

REUTERS/Noah Berger

If you wanted to rip off Elon Musk's idea for Tesla-branded tequila, you may be out of luck.

Tesla filed a federal trademark application dated on Monday for the name "Teslaquila" consisting of either "distilled agave liquor" or "Distilled blue agave liquor. Shortly after, Musk tweeted a "visual approximation" of the alcohol, branded with the Tesla's logo and in its signature typeface.

Twitter/Elon Musk

Musk's mockup appears to be similar to one he posted on Instagram in April, which many took to be an April fools joke. Now, nearly half a year later, it looks like tequila could be the latest in Tesla's arsenal of merchandise it sells to fans.

For his Boring Company tunneling venture, Musk raised $1 million and drew media attention last year for selling 50,000 branded hats, and earlier this year, he raised $10 million by selling 20,000 branded flamethrowers. Last week, Musk said the Boring Company would sell interlocking, Lego-style bricks made from rock and soil displaced by the company's tunnel-digging machines.

Despite a $20 million settlement with the Securities and Exchange Commission that includes a provision for more company oversight of his social media use, the billionaire has been making waves on Twitter once again. Last week, he jokingly called the stock market regulator the "Shortseller Enrichment Commission."

You can read every puzzling thing that has happened since Elon Musk tweeted that he had 'funding secured' to take Tesla private here. 

Oracle PR/Flickr

Two months after disclosing a $535 million investment in both Dell and it's recently acquired tracking stock, VMware, Carl Icahn announced Monday he has upped his stake in the tracking stock to more than 8% — or over $2 billion. 

The billionaire activist investor, now VMware's second-largest shareholder, published a scathing letter bashing the proposed $21.7 billion buyout by Dell that could make the computer giant publicly traded once again.

"While we have unearthed many undervalued opportunities in the past, very few companies compare to the current opportunity and the massive undervaluation of DVMT — which exists in plain sight for all to see," Icahn said in the letter published online Monday.

The true value of VMware should be $144, according to Icahn, who maintains the deal in its current form values the company at closer to $94. By his calculations, VMware could generate $12 per share in free cash flow over "a few years," resulting in a value of more than $250 a share. VMware holders shouldn't agree to the deal "unless it contains a very, very substantial increase," Icahn said. 

As a tracking stock, VMware's financial information is reported separately from Dell’s private books, but offer holders no equity stake in the subsidiary business unit. Dell plans to buy VMware’s outstanding shares for about $109 per share in cash for DVMT, while valuing Dell's new shares at around $80, according to Bloomberg. VMware holders will receive 1.3665 shares of the new stock for every one they own. 

Icahn isn't the only one concerned about the deal. 

In February, Morgan Stanley analysts Keith Weiss and Sanjit Singh called  it the "worst case scenario" for VMware shareholders. They see VMware being worth $143, roughly in-line with Icahn's measurements. 

"Clearly Michael Dell and Silver Lake take us for fools if they think that we would exchange this future value potential for only $94 per share," Icahn said. "I intend to do everything in my power to STOP this proposed DVMT merger."

Markets Insider

The US Justice Department has charged a Russian woman with links to a close ally of President Vladimir Putin with conspiring to interfere in the upcoming US midterm elections.

The criminal complaint, filed in September and publicly disclosed on Friday, alleges that Elena Khusyaynova was instrumental in a wide-ranging campaign to influence American politics via social media, evidence that Russian attempts to interfere in domestic American affairs did not end with the 2016 US election.

The efforts, apparently referred to as Project Lakhta," involved the creation of thousands of social media and email accounts, and had a budget of more than $35 million, the criminal complaint alleges.

As in 2016, the fake accounts posted highly politically charged content to social media platforms like Facebook and Twitter in apparent attempts to inflame the domestic political divisions that have split America.

The material shared was apparently both left- and right-wing in nature — but the examples the criminal complaint has publicized are typically on the right of the spectrum, and range from fiscally conservative memes to far-right, Islamophobic talking points.

They demonstrate how Russian trolls are leaping on — and fueling — right-wing narratives in the United States in attempts to sow political division. In one example, a Russian conspirator using the fake name "Rachell Edison" posted a meme that belittled concerns about police brutality and racism, accusing the mainstream media (or "MSM") of having "warped judgement.

US Justice Department

In another, "Bertha Malone" praised Donald Trump for removing government regulations.

US Justice Department

Other examples provided in the criminal complaint are more extreme. One Islamophobic image, also shared by "Bertha Malone," suggests Islam is a "cult," and was captioned; "Dam right! and we all know which cult we need to kick out of America..."

US Justice Department

A fourth image spreads the conspiracy theory that Obama has "ties to the Muslim Brotherhood," with the caption adding that "media should investigate this traitor and his plane [sic] to Islamize this country."

US Justice Department

Do you work at Facebook? Got a tip? Contact this reporter via Signal or WhatsApp 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., WeChat at robaeprice, or Twitter DM at @robaeprice. (PR pitches by email only, please.) You can also contact Business Insider securely via SecureDrop.

Careem, a Middle East rival to Uber, has closed an initial $200 million raise in a funding round co-led by Saudi Arabia's Kingdom Holding Company and other existing backers.

Kingdom Holding Company is an investment vehicle for Saudi's richest man, billionaire Prince Alwaleed bin Talal.

One source with knowledge of the matter said the deal values Dubai-headquartered Careem at upwards of $2 billion, and the ride-hailing firm eventually hopes to raise $500 million. The money will be used for expansion.

Mudassir Sheikha, CEO and cofounder of Careem, said: "Internet-enabled services are having a profound and positive impact on our region, where the consumer internet opportunity is huge and untapped.

"As a platform with 30 million users and presence in 120+ cities, Careem is uniquely positioned to tap into this opportunity by expanding into new verticals."

Careem operates in 15 countries across the Middle East, and boasts a little under half of Uber's user numbers. The company made headlines when it began working with female cab drivers in Saudi Arabia after the country lifted its driving ban on women in June.

Other lead investors in this round include Al Tayyar Group, Rakuten, and STV.

Prince Alwaleed bin Talal, Saudi's richest man and a member of the royal family.AP Photo

The deal comes at a sensitive time.

Saudi Arabia and its crown prince Mohammed bin Salman are under global scrutiny over the disappearance of Saudi journalist and Washington Post columnist Jamal Khashoggi. Khashoggi entered the Saudi consulate in Istanbul, Turkey on October 2 and has not been seen since. Turkish authorities have said he was brutally murdered and dismembered by Saudi agents, and that they have evidence to back this up.

Careem investor Prince Alwaleed bin Talal has run afoul of the Saudi authorities himself. His net worth has tumbled 58% since 2012, according to Bloomberg, in part thanks to his sudden detention last year in an anti-corruption crackdown. He is also reportedly a friend of Jamal Khashoggi.

Yet bin Talal's tech investments through Kingdom Holding, which includes Apple, Twitter, and Snap, have come under scrutiny as US companies try to reconcile their discomfort with Saudi Arabia's behaviour with the fact that the country is the biggest single investor for US startups.

One reason this may matter for Careem is that it has been in acquisition talks with Uber this summer, according to a source with knowledge of the matter. A spokeswoman declined to comment on whether the talks were still ongoing.

Uber's chief executive Dara Khosrowshahi recently pulled out of a Saudi investment conference, thanks to the uncertainty around Khashoggi. While Saudi's wealth fund happens to have a large stake in Uber, it's possible the company may back away from further ties for now.

Facebook can't afford to repeat the mistakes of 2016.

During the 2016 US presidential election, the social network was wildly abused by Russian propagandists, who spread fake news and misinformation on a massive scale — setting off a chain reaction of scandals for Facebook that reverberates to this day.

Two years later, America is gearing up for its contentious midterm elections, and Facebook is eager to show progress in its fight against election-meddling.

On Wednesday, the Silicon Valley firm invited journalists into its Menlo Park, California headquarters, to tour the "war room" it has put in place to tackle election-related issues in the US midterms and the presidential election campaign still ongoing in Brazil.

What is the Facebook 'war room?'

The "war room" is literally that — a room of experts and team members in one place where they can coordinate more effectively — and Facebook can point to it as a symbol of its efforts to be far more prepared this time around. And while its clear the company has made significant strides in some areas, there are still some worrying indicators that all is perhaps not well.

Rob Price/Business Insider

The war room is a cluster of sitting and standing desks, home to around 20-30 people at once, representing 20 different teams across the company, from threat intelligence to moderation. The walls are draped with American and Brazilian flags, alongside clocks showing different time zones and televisions blaring cable news.

Big computer screens, meanwhile, display everything from relevant internal analytics and video conferences with other offices, and recent tweets in the TweetDeck app.

Facebook has pinned up fancy posters for the "WAR ROOM" inside and outside the room. Rob Price/Business Insider

The physical presence of other people means there's a guaranteed immediacy and faster reaction time when something happens, Facebook's head of civic engagement Samidh Chakrabarti said: "When you message someone, do you know if you have their attention?"

And the few-dozen people in the room also work with their own respective teams throughout Facebook, making the War Room a "nerve centre of this much broader effort," said Nathaniel Gleicher, Facebook's head of cybersecurity policy.

How does Facebook plan on protecting the elections?

There are three main pillars to Facebook's attempts to protecting elections, company executives said. It is cracking down on fake accounts. It is making advertising more transparent. And it is trying to tackle the distribution of fake news and misinformation.

Progress has been made on this, including the creation of an archive of political advertisements that anyone can view.

The room the "War Room" is in is booked up until November 8, two days after the US midterms. Rob Price/Business Insider

But while Facebook has attempted to crack down on fake news on its core Facebook app, it's still a problem on other apps it owns — notably messaging app WhatsApp. A recent study found that the majority of the most popular political content shared on the encrypted messaging app in Brazil is false of misleading.

When pressed by reporters, Facebook execs didn't have a satisfying answer on how it would try and combat the flow of fake news and misinformation, instead pointing to minor cosmetic changes like the addition of a "Forwarded" indicator next to messages that have been forwarded, to show when a message didn't originate with the sender.

The authors of the report into misleading information on the app suggested possible changes to WhatsApp, including restricting forwarding and limiting the size of new groups, they wrote in a column in The New York Times— but were apparently told by the company "there was not enough time to implement the changes."

The risk of fake news spread via WhatsApp is less acute in the midterm elections in America, where relatively few people use the app as their primary communication service. But in elections in Europe and elsewhere in the world, the danger is profound. And it's still not clear that Facebook has a handle on it.

Do you work at Facebook? Got a tip? Contact this reporter via Signal or WhatsApp 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., WeChat at robaeprice, or Twitter DM at @robaeprice. (PR pitches by email only, please.) You can also contact Business Insider securely via SecureDrop.

Now read:

eBay filed a lawsuit against Amazon on Wednesday alleging that it is has been illegally poaching high-value sellers by infiltrating eBay's internal messaging system, The Wall Street Journal reports.

eBay first accused Amazon of unlawfully poaching its sellers in early October. At the time, Amazon said it was investigating the allegations.

"For years, and unbeknownst to eBay, Amazon has been engaged in a systematic, coordinated effort to infiltrate and exploit eBay's proprietary M2M system on eBay's platform to lure top eBay sellers to Amazon," the Journal reports eBay alleges in the suit.

M2M is the company's member-to-member contact system, which allows sellers to communicate with each other, eBay, and customers.

"The scheme is startling in breadth — involving large numbers of Amazon representatives ("Amazon reps"), targeting many hundreds of eBay sellers, and spanning several countries overseas and many states in the United States (including California)."

eBay also claims that Amazon coordinated the effort from its headquarters, citing the fact that many of the messages sent were similar or even identical to each other, and that many accounts used to send the messages were attached to devices linked to Amazon internet protocol addresses, the Journal reports.

eBay alleges that three accounts created by a single individual sent 120 messages to sellers, and that Amazon representatives admitted they were breaking eBay's rules.

eBay also says some of the Amazon representatives were successful in poaching sellers, openly discussing their exploits with those they were targetting.

Business Insider has contacted Amazon and eBay for comment. Amazon told the Journal that it is carrying out a thorough investigation of the accusations.

New York Attorney General Barbara Underwood has launched an investigation into the parent company of popular movie-ticket subscription service MoviePass for allegedly misleading investors, according to CNBC.

The attorney general's office is probing whether Helios and Matheson (HMNY) "misled the investment community regarding the company's financials," CNBC reported, citing a "source familiar with the matter." The investigation is in its "early stages," according to the report.

Helios and Matheson confirmed the existence of an investigation in a statement to Business Insider.

"We are aware of the New York Attorney General's inquiry and are fully cooperating," the company said. "We believe our public disclosures have been complete, timely and truthful and we have not misled investors. We look forward to the opportunity to demonstrate that to the New York Attorney General."

The attorney general's office did not immediately return a request for comment.

Business Insider reported in August that Helios and Matheson had covered hundreds of millions in losses by selling millions of new shares of stock to shareholders, and that company CEO Ted Farnsworth had made several promises to investors at a July shareholders meeting that began to unravel soon after.

Business Insider also interviewed Helios and Matheson shareholders in July who expressed frustration with management. Many had seen their stakes dwindle over 99% in value and some had lost more than $100,000. Several felt misled by Wall Street analysts who kept "buy" ratings on the stock while their banks made millions in fees selling Helios and Matheson stock as it collapsed.

Helios and Matheson has a long and complicated history that Business Insider outlined in a piece in July. The company was once the US subsidary of an Indian company (Helios and Matheson Information Technology) which stands accused of defrauding at least 5,000 creditors in India, including banks and senior citizens.

HMIT began to extricate itself from the US business in 2016 when HMNY merged with Farnsworth's money-losing startup, Zone Technologies. Since then, HMIT's ownership stake has dwindled, though executives from the Indian company remain involved with the MoviePass owner.

Helios and Matheson in New York bought MoviePass in August of last year, and drastically dropped the monthly price to $9.95, a move which meant that the company could lose money on some customers who went to just one movie per month. That move has meant a skyrocketing user base and losses to match.

In recent months, MoviePass has tried to get its cash burn under control by introducing features unpopular with users like limiting showtimes and capping usage at three movies per month. But it has continued to cover losses by selling new shares and diluting previous shareholders. This strategy has angered many investors.

On Tuesday, Helios and Matheson announced that it had postponed a crucial shareholders meeting until November 1. At the meeting, Helios and Matheson will ask for approval on an amendment for a one-time reverse stock split of up to 1-for-500 shares. The 1-for-500 reverse split is the latest attempt by Helios and Matheson to revive the stock, which if it continues trading below $1 could be delisted from the Nasdaq by mid-December.

However, the last reverse split Helios and Matheson enacted in July did not prove successful in stabilizing the stock price, as it began to crash immediately following the 1-for-250 reverse split.

Helios and Matheson stock was trading at around $0.02 on Wednesday.