Every day, over 5 million New Yorkers rely on the subway system to get to work, doctor appointments, daycare, college classes, dates, shops — you name it. With 665 miles of track, 472 stations, and 27 lines, NYC's subway system is one of the largest in the world.

At the same time, it has the worst on-time performance of any other major transit system globally. The system's operator, the Metropolitan Transportation Authority (MTA), said that just 58.1% of all weekday trains arrived on time in January, The New York Times reported.

A new report by the Federal Reserve Bank of New York explores how the severity of those delays may vary by income. The researchers considered data on subway delay times, track work, and alternative options for riders in various tax brackets across Brooklyn, Queens, the Bronx, and Manhattan.

The study found that New Yorkers living in high-income neighborhoods — the Upper West Side, SoHo, Tribeca — tend to experience fewer subway delays and lower commute times than those in lower-income neighborhoods. Neighborhoods with the worst delays include Coney Island, East New York, and Harlem.

Advertisement

Nicole Gorton and Maxim Pinkovskiy, the study's authors, recognize a possible reason why: A short commute is often expensive, because people are willing to pay more to live closer to the subway.

Another reason is that further-out, less expensive neighborhoods tend to have longer commute times overall, which means there are more opportunities for delays. Low-income New Yorkers also have fewer transit alternatives — like bikeshares, buses, and ferries — when the subway breaks down.

Due to cost, taxis and rideshare services tend to be less accessible for low-income residents.

Gorton and Pinkovskiy said that their findings suggest more serious consequences than more time spent on the subway. Low-income New Yorkers are losing time on trains that they could spend on more important things.

"Aside from the obvious frustration of unanticipated delays, longer commutes mean people risk losing pay, or even their jobs, and may have less time to invest in their health, education, and children," Gorton and Pinkovskiy wrote. "That is bad news for all New Yorkers."

Advertisement

There's no clear solution to the issue, especially as the MTA prepares to shut down a major train line connecting Brooklyn to Manhattan for 15 months.

Over the past year, Google has been embroiled in a boatload of scandals centered on the way its employees treat each other. The company has now taken its first steps to put the kibosh on one underlying cause of these scandals: the company's internal, employee community message boards.

On Wednesday, Google confirmed on Twitter that it released new "guidelines" this week for employees about what is and isn't considered okay behavior on these boards. Most of them seem like common sense, including rules about thinking before you post and treating others with respect.

But the rules also pack a punch. Employees are warned that if they behave badly, they could face discipline. Over-the-top behavior is defined generally as posting material or comments, or making such comments in person, that doesn't align with the company's values or that "are disruptive to a productive work environment."

Google is not shutting down its internal message boards, which are moderated by volunteers, the Wall Street Journal's Douglas Macmillan reports. The search giant is, however, making it clear that the boards are officially no longer a free-for-all. Employees who start a discussion group are empowered to delete or remove over-the-top posts.

Advertisement

These new community standards have their roots in the 2017 scandal, when Google fired James Damore after one of his posts to the internal boards caused a national uproar. He argued that women are less suited to engineering than men, biologically speaking — an idea that's been fiercely refuted by experts — and that the true problem with Silicon Valley is how it treats conservatives, a minority political affiliation in the Bay Area.

Tensions flew after that, on the boards and elsewhere. Lawsuits filed in the wake of the incident included messages posted on internal message boards by employees where people threatened to blacklist other employees. Some employees were "doxed," their personal details, like a home address, leaked as a way to incite retaliatory behavior.

More recently, there was an employee uprising at Google, in which employees pressured the company not to work on projects for the military. Things got so heated that Google CEO Sundar Pichai bowed to the mob and promised, in its way, to never help the military build artificial intelligence-powered weapons.

However, one person close to the company said that the discussions on the boards regarding military contracts were actually largely civil and respectful, and would have been compliant with these new guidelines.

In any case, this latest uproar is still causing fallout. As Business Insider's Greg Sandoval reports, one of Google's star engineers is now on the hot seat: Dr. Fei-Fei Li who is leading its all-important artificial intelligence unit, is under scrutiny for her role in defending Project Maven, a project between Google and the Pentagon.

Advertisement

Meanwhile, employees have been told they will be held accountable if their posts to the internal boards cause scandals, wind up as evidence in lawsuits, or otherwise impact other employees and the company.

To be sure, the last year of scandals aren't the first time Google employees have talked about the good, bad and ugly going on on these message boards. For instance, Google's Memegen is infamous. It's an internal site where employees create and share memes, many of them irreverent or political.

Way back in 2013, in fact, a Google employee involved in a discussion on Hacker News about the downsides of Google's culture, described it like this: "There's also the ones who think they're still in college and don't understand simple things such as being mature and respectful with your fellow Googlers. The latter you can see spending a lot of time posting passive aggressive memes on memegen."

Here are the part of the new guidelines that Google tweeted out.

Google community guidelines

When David tried to download apps on his iPhone and iPad recently, he found he wasn't able to because his account was linked to something called "Family Sharing."

That's a feature that Apple introduced in 2014 to make it easier to share apps, iCloud storage, and iTunes content like music and movies with up to five family members.

But this was news to David, who says he didn't remember turning on Family Sharing. After he dug into his account settings, he received a popup that to remove himself from the Family Sharing account he needed to contact a name that was in Chinese — and he had no way to get in touch.

David called Apple's support line, and they were able to fix the issue for him, but weren't able to tell him exactly why it happened nor anything he could do to keep his account safe in the future, he said. The problem was resolved, but the ordeal "struck me as odd," he told Business Insider in an email.

Not the only instance

ImgurIt is difficult to quantify how widespread the account hijacking involving Family Sharing is, but David is not the only person who has encountered it.

There are a handful of posts on Apple's support forums and Reddit that detail similar stories of accounts that couldn't buy apps or in-app purchases due to issues involving the feature.

One account, from April, is particularly detailed, and even suggests why the hackers might be trying this attack.

It starts when the author, Emmerage, receives an email from Apple saying that someone had purchased an app on his account.

Although he was "wary of phishing scams," he writes that after logging in to his account independently, he discovered someone had changed his name to Chinese characters, and a second account connected to the Apple ID had been buying a bunch of in-app purchases for the app Youku, a Chinese video app, using someone else's credit card and a fake Australian billing address.

From the April post on Apple's support forums:

"I find it difficult to believe that someone would go to that much trouble just to spend $100 on someone else's credit card to buy games and other crap on Youku. Also, I can't see how they would be able to reliably intercept confirmations and so on using a compromised email - there's nothing in trash, and I get my email notifications on my phone, surely I would have seen something? Surely they would have intercepted the purchase email I saw that made me change all the passwords? There has been no suspicious activity at all regarding my email, or the Apple ID until now, and no logins from new devices or anything else I would have expected to get a notification for if someone overseas was accessing any of my accounts."

Advertisement

Other posts suggested the attackers were interested in buying iTunes gift cards with the account's balance or credit card.

"The most obvious way that could happen is if a hacker gained control of the victim's Apple ID," Thomas Reed, an Apple-focused researcher at security firm MalwareBytes, told Business Insider in an email. "This could provide a simple way to monetize a hacked Apple ID, and I did notice that one person reporting this kind of issue specifically mentioned he didn't have two-factor authentication turned on."

"So an unauthorized access to the victim's Apple ID account could explain it. In this case, enabling two-factor authentication should prevent that kind of unauthorized access," he continued.

Apple ID usernames and passwords can be an attractive target for scammers, who sometimes use Apple's security features to lock the data on an attacked device and ask for ransom.

Separately, in 2017, police in China reportedly arrested 22 people who resold information related to Apple ID accounts for between 10 and 180 yuan per account, or between $1.50 and $27.

What you can do

How permission through Family Sharing works.AppleThere are several potential reasons why this could be happening.

When setting up Family Sharing, the user being added receives an email or text with an option to join or decline, according to Apple. It's possible that many of these people who have reported the problem may have received the notification and mistakenly approved it, although most of the reports online say they believe that didn't happen.

There's another way to add an account to Family Sharing: if the administrator of the family has your password. This is useful for parents and other legitimate Family Sharing users.

But that also means that an attacker could obtain someone's password, perhaps through a fake phishing email or one of the leaked databases out there, and then use that password to take over the Apple ID account.

But if an attacker had your Apple ID and password, that means could gain access to your account directly if two-factor is not turned on. So it's still unclear why the Family Sharing feature is entering into this phenomenon — why would a scammer make purchases with a linked account instead of the original?

There is one solid way to make your Apple ID more secure: by turning on two-factor authentication. That means in order to log in, a password and user ID wouldn't be enough — they'd need a 6-digit code from your phone or another trusted device.

Regardless, it's a reminder that you should practice good account security, especially with important accounts. Don't reuse passwords, don't use bad passwords like "password," and turn on two-factor authentication wherever possible.

Advertisement

Have you noticed Family Sharing-related weirdness on your Apple ID? Do you know what's going on here? Email the author at This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it..

Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez, a Democratic Socialist born and raised in the Bronx, defeated longtime incumbent Joseph Crowley in a primary race for New York's 14th District on Tuesday.

As 28-year-old Ocasio-Cortez begins her meteoric rise in politics — this November, she's highly likely to become the youngest woman ever elected to the US House of Representatives — observers have pointed out that she has an asteroid named after her, called 23238 Ocasio-Cortez.

The Democratic politician confirmed this fact in early June.

"It's true! Science was my first passion," she tweeted on June 12, adding that the asteroid was named in honor of longevity experiments she conducted out of Mt. Sinai Health System in New York.

Advertisement

"My research won 2nd place globally in Microbiology at @intel ISEF," she said in the tweet, referring to the Intel International Science and Engineering Fair. "At [Boston University] I started as science major, changed to Econ “#nerdalert"

How Ocasio-Cortez got a space rock named after her

A campaign flyer for Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez.Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez 2018

The asteroid in question was discovered on November 20, 2000, by the Lincoln Observatory Near-Earth Asteroid Research (LINEAR) program at MIT's Lincoln Laboratory.

Not anyone can officially name an asteroid: That duty belongs International Astronomical Union, the world's official record-keeper of celestial objects. According to IAU rules, the person or people who discover an asteroid get 10 years to suggest a name.

Jenifer Evans, an electrical engineer at MIT Lincoln Laboratory, was one of the lead scientists on LINEAR along with her boss Grant Stokes — so they had the naming rights to all the asteroids the program found. LINEAR, built in 1996, uses ground-based telescopes at the White Sands Missile Range in New Mexico to scan for asteroids and comets — especially any that may pose a threat to our planet. It was one of the first high-power surveys of the night sky, so it discovered more than 140,000 asteroids.

Advertisement

Evans and Stokes decided to keep things "honorable" by handing out asteroid names to the winners of top science and engineering fairs for students.

"We didn't want to make it willy-nilly. We wanted to keep it exclusive," Evans told Business Insider. She said first- and second-place winners of three major student competitions, plus some teachers and mentors, get naming rights.

"Usually science people aren't in the newspaper," Evans said. "This is a way to encourage an interest in science because local newspapers will write up, 'Tommy Smith had an asteroid after him.' It's almost as cool as, 'Tommy Smith made three touchdowns at the football game.'"

Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez celebrates at a victory party in the Bronx on June 26, 2018. Scott Heins/Getty This is where Ocasio-Cortez comes in.

When she submitted her high-school microbiology project in 2007 and won second place at Intel's science and engineering fair, she automatically won the naming rights to an asteroid found by LINEAR.

From there, Evans worked with the IAU to propose the name "23238 Ocasio-Cortez" and ask its 13-member judging panel to approve the title. The name passed in August 2007, affixing Ocasio-Cortez's name to a space rock.

About 15,000 asteroids have been named after people, and Ocasio-Cortez was far from the first student — the naming program has been going since 2001.

Today, about 4,000 middle- and high-school students have had asteroids named after them, which represents nearly a fifth of all named space rocks.

What we know about asteroid 23238 Ocasio-Cortez

An illustration of an asteroid. Reuters/NASA

Not too much is known about asteroid 23238 Ocasio-Cortez, since no spacecraft has ever visited it for an up-close look.

Advertisement

"We have no idea what any of these are. We only see it as a bright spot," Evans said, adding that it's only visible through a telescope and not with a naked eye. "And you can't tell the difference between a star and an asteroid at first. It looks like a star until it moves from one picture to the next."

However, observations by LINEAR and other telescopes have pinned down some basic pieces of knowledge about the rock, which NASA's Jet Propulsion Laboratory has logged in an expansive database of asteroids.

Asteroid 23238 Ocasio-Cortez is about 1.44 miles wide and an average of 240 million miles from Earth. This puts it in the Asteroid Belt, which is an expansive zone between Mars and Jupiter.

Mark Sykes, director of the Planetary Science Institute, says the rock appears to be what's called a "QV" type asteroid.

"These guys were blasted off the surface of Vesta, the second-largest asteroid in the solar system, from the impact of another asteroid at its south pole," Sykes, who works on the Dawn mission (which visited Vesta), told Business Insider. "So her asteroid could be a piece of Vesta."

Full view of Vesta.NASA/ JPL-Caltech/ UCLA/ MPS/ DLR/ IDAIt takes the space rock about 3 years, 10 months, 9 days, and 18 hours to make one trip around the sun. During that trip, which is slightly oval-shaped, 23238 Ocasio-Cortez travels slightly above the plane of the solar system for about half the time, and dips below it the other half. It's a very stable orbit, so the asteroid is unlikely to doom Earth.

"It'll never get close to the Earth, and it'll always be beyond Mars. Unless something weird happens," Sykes said.

Evans said naming "safe" asteroids after students was very deliberate.

"We want to assure all the students that their asteroid will never impact Earth," Evans said.

Although it's a pretty typical space rock, Evans said few people get anything named after them — let alone a 4.5-billion-year-old object that's likely to outlast the human race by billions if not trillions of years.

This story was updated with new information.

What would you be willing to give up in order to keep your smartphone privileges for a week?

A lot of consumers say they would be willing to temporarily stop using household items or give up their favorite pastimes; some are apparently willing to adopt questionable hygiene standards.

As it turns out, 41% of millennials ages 18 to 34 said they would be willing to quit shampooing for a week if it meant keeping their phone for that same period of time, according to a survey conducted by app-based phone service Visible. All 1,180 respondents owned a cell phone and were split almost evenly by gender using the census' breakdown.

Entertaining as it might be, this statistic brings to mind the conversation surrounding smartphone addiction that has been consuming various companies, adults, and teens. While some argue that it's on the product and platform creators to help control our dependence on mobile devices, others say it's our own responsibility — and a good first step is knowing where you stand.

Advertisement

In the survey, a similar number of respondents (54%) said they would be willing to give up movies and TV for a month, while 28% said they would be willing to give up their pet for the week, 23% chose their phone over caffeine, and a small 17% took the 'take my toothbrush but not my cell phone' approach.

Given the capabilities of today's smartphones, it doesn't come as a huge surprise that consumers would be willing to prioritize them more than they did a decade ago. But these results — particularly the ones about habits we're taught are crucial from an early age — are an interesting look at just how a generation that has lived with smartphones for all or most of their adult life sees their mobile devices as necessity over luxury.

June 27, 2018

Mahendra Ramsinghani, my friend and co-author of Startup Boards: Getting the Most Out of Your Board of Directors, is starting work on his third book to be titled Depression – A Founder’s Companion. If this is an important topic to you, please spend 10 minutes on the survey Mahendra is doing.

After the recent passing of Kate Spade and Anthony Bourdain, the conversation around depression and suicide has escalated in a generally constructive way. More people are talking openly about depression, especially among highly creative and successful people. While the stigma around depression and other mental health issues in our society is still extremely significant, the leadership from an increasing number of visible people around their struggles is starting to make a dent in the stigma.

Mahendra’s goal is to publish a book that tells stories, anecdotes, triggers, advice, poetry, and support of all kinds from people who have struggled with depression. It’ll be aimed at, but not limited to, entrepreneurs who have struggled with depression. By compiling and sharing this writing, the journey can become easier and the stigma may continue to be diminished.

While I am not writing the book, I am supporting the concept and have agreed to write the foreword. I believe now is the time for us to accelerate our awareness of depression and continue to build support systems to help founders. We should not wait for yet another star to burn-out prematurely.

The data Mahendra is collecting on the Google form-based survey is anonymized. If you want to connect with Mahendra to go deeper on this topic, there’s an optional field at the end of the survey for your email address.

For anyone who is willing to participate in this project, thanks in advance.

Also published on Medium.

The scooter armageddon in San Francisco was over almost as quickly as it began.

After the city received complaints of scooters routinely blocking sidewalks and building entrances, causing people to trip, and making sidewalks less accessible for people with mobility issues, it slapped the three high-profile scooter companies with cease and desist orders. Those startups are now vying for a limited number of permits from the city.

Now, Mark Lawrence, the CEO of parking startup SpotHero, tells Business Insider that his company is very close to a solution for the complaint that largely led to the scooter crackdown in the first place: The fact that because there's no dedicated scooter parking, they tend to get dumped anywhere and everywhere on streets and sidewalks.

Several scooter companies are in talks with SpotHero, an app that makes it fast and convenient to book a parking spot across 49 cities, to dock scooters in parking garages or share data to ensure scooters are located where they will most likely be used.

Advertisement

Lawrence said since the drama around scooter-sharing has unfolded, several companies — which he declined to name — approached SpotHero about working together to find a solution for scooter parking.

One of the most well-funded players in the scooter market, Lime, told Business Insider it's in conversation with several partners that will "allow us to extend access of our scooters to more riders."

"SpotHero is an example of an innovative compapany that would complement Lime's overall rider experience," a Lime spokesperson said.

Mark Lawrence is the cofounder and CEO of SpotHero. SpotHero

The other top two scooter companies, Bird and Spin, did not immediately respond to a request for comment. Bird, the most valuable of the three, is said to be valuing itself at $2 billion as it pursues new funding.

SpotHero works by linking drivers with over 5,000 parking lots, garages, and valets across the US and Canada. In the app, a driver can find, reserve, and pay for a spot with just a few clicks. SpotHero takes a commission on every reservation made.

Lawrence said some commuters want to drive into the city, park somewhere, and book a scooter the rest of the way to their destination. Someday, scooter companies might put scooters in SpotHero locations to make their lives easier and rake in their business.

Data could also help scooter companies be smarter. If SpotHero knows there's a big event coming up and lots of parking spots in a certain radius are booked in advance, the startup could tip off scooter companies to deploy their scooters there, Lawrence said.

"We know where millions of people are already going to pay to park and where they're going to be. A percentage of those are going to need a scooter, and so the question is, is that scooter going to be physically available where people need it?" Lawrence said.

The benefits are twofold: Scooter users can more easily find the vehicles, while more scooters will find homes in garages instead of taking up space on sidewalks.

Advertisement

It would be a surprising twist in the scooter saga, because all of these scooter companies market their vehicles as "dockless." People reserve a local scooter on their phone, ride for a small fee, and at the end of the journey, leave the scooter wherever to be claimed by the next rider. Not having docking stations is part of what makes them convenient.

Lawrence said the talks with scooter companies are still early, but he's optimistic that his startup will partner with others to improve the scooter situation for everybody.

"The way we do it isn't so much important as the why, which is, so we can make mobility better, so we can reduce congestion, so we can get people to move in and out of cities," he said.

Dr. Fei-Fei Li, Google's chief scientist for artificial intelligence, has been a rising star at the company since arriving in the November of 2016.

Her future with the company, however, is unclear.

Li, an associate professor at Stanford University and chief of the school's AI lab, took a leave of absence to work at Google. According to material posted online, Li is due to return from leave sometime in the second half of this year, a period that begins now.

Leading up to last month, Li appeared to be someone Google might want to tempt into staying. Her personal history has turned her into something of a media star. She immigrated to the US from China when she was 16 without knowing a word of English and climbed her way to the top of Google's management ranks, earning a PhD along the way. In 2016 Li was named a Great Immigrant by the Carnegie Corporation.

Advertisement

But then came the employee backlash to Google's agreement to supply the military AI tech that could help analyze drone-surveillance footage and Li found herself caught up in the months-long internal dispute.

With the drama from the controversy still playing out, Google's star acquisition in the ultra-competitive AI field appears to be preparing to move on. "Dr. Li's plans for Google and Stanford remain unchanged," a Google spokesperson told Business Insider, declining to elaborate further.

Leaked emails make for bad optics

It's not clear if Li was directly involved in winning the military contract, or whether she personally played any role in making it happen. But inside Google, which long prided itself on its "Don't be Evil" motto, she has taken a lot of the heat for the controversial deal.

After news of that contract circulated within Google, more than 4,000 employees signed a petition demanding that management reverse the decision. A dozen employees later quit in protest. Google eventually yielded to many of the demands and has since promised not to ever build AI for weapons.

Sources among current and former Googlers who spoke to Business Insider say Li has been criticized because of comments she made during a September email exchange with other Google managers. Those emails were leaked last month to The New York Times and The Intercept and have proven to be embarrassing for Google as well as Li.

The emails reveal a discussion between Li and other managers, who were fretting about how to release news to the public about Google's first big contract with the Pentagon.

"Avoid at ALL COSTS any mention or implication of AI," she wrote in an email, according to The New York Times. "Weaponized AI is probably one of the most sensitized topics of AI — if not THE most. This is red meat to the media to find all ways to damage Google."

In another message, Li wrote: "I don't know what would happen if the media starts picking up a theme that Google is secretly building AI weapons or AI technologies to enable weapons for the Defense industry," according to The Intercept. "Google Cloud has been building our theme on Democratizing AI in 2017, and Diane (Greene, Google cloud chief) and I have been talking about Humanistic AI for enterprise. I'd be super careful to protect these very positive images."

AI for good

Google CEO Sundar Pichai speaks with reporters at the 2018 I/O developer conference Greg Sandoval/Business Insider To some Googlers, those comments made Li appear complicit in the AI deal with the Pentagon. Worse, the comments struck them as being at odds with Li's public image of being an advocate for the ethical use of AI.

Even before arriving at Google, Li was a well-known AI booster and ethicist.

She has written often about the importance of developing "AI for good," and "human-centered AI," and AI that benefits all humans and "not just the privileged few." She has cautioned that "enthusiasm for AI is preventing us from reckoning with its looming effects on society."

Li's critics say she didn't appear very concerned about "AI for good" or ethics when discussing a military contract that should at least have rang some alarm bells. As a result, they say, her credibility and effectiveness as an AI evangelist are compromised.

To be sure, Li was not the only Google executive who seemed more than willing to work with the Pentagon, and she certainly wasn't the final decision maker on the deal. At multiple all-hands meetings, Diane Greene, the person overseeing Google's contracts with the Pentagon, defended them arguing that Google's contributions were strictly for non-offensive purposes.

It's possible that Li could continue to work at Google, perhaps with an "advisor" title if she returns to Stanford. What Li has going for her is that Google CEO Sundar Pichai has said that AI is vital to the company's future, and she is considered one of the top AI experts in the world.

"AI is one of the most important things humanity is working on," Pichai said earlier this year. "It is more profound than, I don't know, electricity or fire."

With Amazon, Microsoft, Facebook and other tech rivals bolstering their AI teams, Google would likely prefer not to lose Li to a competitor — optics issues aside. And now that Google has given up on working with the military on weapons, and the billions of dollars that those contracts might have generated, Google is going to need all the AI brainpower and ethical guidance it can get.

Tesla CEO Elon Musk send a companywide email on Wednesday refuting estimates by a Goldman Sachs analyst that the electric car company would miss second-quarter production targets of its Model 3 sedan.

David Tamberrino, a Goldman Sachs analyst who has had a sell rating on Tesla since last February, wrote that deliveries were not meeting expectations and that second-quarter production numbers were "elevated."

Musk did not agree with Goldman Sachs' assessment.

"They're in for a rude awakening :)" Musk wrote in an email obtained by Bloomberg.com. Musk then linked his comments to a CNBC story that showed Goldman expected Tesla to deliver 22,000 Model 3s at the close of the quarter.

Advertisement

While Tamberrino wrote Tesla would hit 22,000 deliveries of its Model 3 electric-sedan, the number falls well short of the 28,000 number chosen as an industry-wide consensus. CNBC reports Tamberrino based his conclusion on data from InsideEVs.com, GreenCarReports.com, and registration bureaus in various European countries.

Tesla has stated it expects to make 5,000 cars per week by the end of this month, but Musk has repeatedly changed Model 3 production targets.

During a first-quarter earnings call in May 2016, Musk said Tesla aimed to make 100,000 to 200,000 Model 3s in the second half of 2017. He did not come close. This year, only 9,766 Model 3s rolled out in the first quarter - a weekly output rate of roughly 750.

Tesla recently revealed "a giant tent" assembly line to help increase its Model 3 delivery numbers, but it's unclear how much impact the makeshift production line has helped the company grow output.

At the time of this writing, Tesla shares were up 2.2 percent at $344.24. The last 12 months have been up and down year for Tesla, with shares down about 9 percent over the past year, but up nearly 10 percent since January. Last September the stock traded as high as $389.61, while hitting its lowest price of $244.59 in April.

Joe Skipper/Reuters

Elon Musk is reportedly not happy with Goldman Sachs latest pessimism on Tesla's stock price.

In an email to Tesla employees on Wednesday, the chief executive sent around a CNBC write up of a research note from the bank which said the company will likely miss Model 3 delivery estimates.

"They are in for a rude awakening :)," he said, per Bloomberg.

Tesla has been running like crazy to meet Musk’s stated goal of producing 5,000 Model 3 sedans per week. It even built a massive tent outside its Fremont, California factory to add an extra assembly line to its arsenal. But so far, those efforts haven't appeared to pay off. 

"Given cadence from production to delivery, we now forecast the company achieving approx. 22,000 Model 3 deliveries to customers in the quarter—up from our previous 19,000 but below consensus of 28,000," David Tamberrino, the bank’s autos analyst, told clients Tuesday in a note seen by Business Insider. That translates to about 1,700 vehicles per week.

Tamberrino has maintained a $195 price target for shares of Tesla since March — a full 40% below where the stock was trading Wednesday.

Musk has repeatedly lambasted analysts with less-than-favorable ratings for Tesla’s stock. In May, during an earnings conference call, he interrupted two analysts attempting to ask questions about Tesla’s financial situation. Musk later tweeted that he ignored their questions because they "represent a short-seller thesis." He has also warned short sellers, or investors with bets riding against Tesla’s stock price, twice in recent weeks that their position will soon "explode."

Regardless of short positions, most of Wall Street remains convinced Tesla will need to raise capital this year. That directly contradicts with the company’s forecast of profitability.

Tesla is likely to announce its second quarter delivery numbers for the Model 3 as well as its other vehicles shortly after the end of the reporting period, as it has in the past. All eyes will be on the production numbers.  Even if the company does reach its goal of 5,000 per week, Goldman Sachs says that may not be sustainable.

"We see the possibility for Tesla to meet the objective, given incremental assembly lines added to the Model 3 program (Grohmann engineering battery module line and an additional general assembly line for the Model 3 at Fremont), and we note that the company has previously reported extrapolated weekly production rates (e.g., derived from several days of production, rather than a full week)" Goldman said.

"However, the question that will remain is how sustainable that run-rate of production is for 3Q18 given the historical volatility of the Model 3 production rate, where Tesla has taken intermittent downtime."

Do you crack under pressure? Crumble when you're stressed? If so, you'd be better off pursuing a career in science or education than you would in healthcare or law enforcement.

Using data from the Occupational Information Network (O*NET), a US Department of Labor database full of detailed information on jobs, we found the 41 professions you should avoid if you really don't like stress.

O*NET rates the "stress tolerance" for each job on a scale from zero to 100, where a higher rating signals more stress. To rate each job, O*NET looks at how frequently workers must accept criticism and deal effectively with high stress at work.

The following are jobs that earned a stress tolerance rating of 93 or higher. We've also included how much they pay, according to the US Bureau of Labor Statistics.

If you're the type of person who thrives under pressure or can stay cool, calm, and collected in high-stress situations, these jobs may be perfect for you. If you're the crack-or-crumble type, you may want to avoid them: