A Finnish bakery is using ground flour from dried crickets.Each loaf contains about 70 crickets.It contains more protein than normal bread.More than 2 billion people eat insects worldwide.

 

Finnish bakery and food service company Fazer has launched what it said was the world's first insect-based bread to be offered to consumers in stores.

The bread, made from flour ground from dried crickets as well as wheat flour and seeds, contains more protein than normal wheat bread. Each loaf contains about 70 crickets.

"The crickets are in the form of flour and they have been ground as a whole cricket and then made into dough and then baked to a very delicious product," said Markus Hellström, CEO of Fazer Bakeries.

The demand to find more food sources and a desire to treat animals more humanely have raised interest in using insects as a protein source in several Western countries.

In November, Finland joined five other European countries - Britain, the Netherlands, Belgium, Austria and Denmark - in allowing insects to be raised and marketed for food use.

A spokesman said Fazer had been developing the bread since last summer. It had to wait for legislation to be passed in Finland for the launch.

"It tastes like bread. It's really good....I don't know!" said Sara Koivisto, a student from Helsinki after trying the new product.

Due to a limited supply of crickets, the insect-bread will initially only be sold in 11 Fazer bakery stores located in Helsinki region hypermarkets, but the company plans to offer it in all 47 of its stores by next year.

The company buys its cricket flour from the Netherlands, but said it was also looking for local suppliers.

Fazer, a family business with sales of about 1.6 billion euros last year, did not give a sales target for the product.

Insect-eating, or entomophagy, is common in much of the world. The United Nations estimated last year that at least 2 billion people eat insects and more than 1,900 species have been used for food.

In Western countries, edible bugs are gaining traction in niche markets, particularly among those seeking a gluten-free diet or wanting to protect the environment because farming insects uses less land, water and feed than animal husbandry.

Produced by Claudia Romeo 

Original author: Claudia Romeo

Bitcoin mining computers are pictured in Bitmain's mining farm near Keflavik, Iceland, June 4, 2016. Picture taken June 4, 2016. REUTERS/Jemima Kelly

New bitcoin is created by computers solving complex cryptographic problems, a process known as "mining." PowerCompare.co.uk says the amount of electricity used by computers mining bitcoin so far this year eclipses the annual usage of countries like Ireland and most African countries. Bitcoin's electricity usage is coming under increasing scrutiny.

LONDON — The amount of energy used by computers "mining" bitcoin so far this year is greater than the annual usage of almost 160 countries, according to new research.

Research by energy tariff comparison service PowerCompare.co.uk shows that the amount of energy expended mining bitcoin globally has already exceeded the amount used on average by Ireland and most African nations.

PowerCompare.co.uk used stats from Bitcoin and cryptocurrency data provider Digiconomist, which estimates that 29.05 TWh of electricity was used to mine bitcoin, compared to an estimated 25 TWh of electricity per year used by Ireland.

You can see a full list of the 159 countries whose energy usage is eclipsed by bitcoin here or see it visualised below (the orange countries are those that use less electricity than bitcoin mining):PowerCompare.co.uk

Bitcoin is a cryptocurrency that was created in 2009. It is designed to not be controlled by any one party and is underpinned by a system called blockchain, which records transactions.

To ensure transactions are not falsified or records of ownership changed, participants of the bitcoin network must sign off on transactions in "blocks" (hence, blockchain).

To incentivize people to do this work, which involves computers completing complex cryptographic problems, people who verify blocks are rewarded with freshly created bitcoin. Hence, this process is known as bitcoin "mining."

However, the creators of bitcoin designed the system so there would only ever be a limited supply of bitcoins to be mined (a maximum of 21 million). To ensure the longevity of the system, the cryptographic problems involved in the mining get progressively harder, meaning it takes longer to earn them.

Miners are turning to more powerful computers to complete these tasks and earn bitcoin. As a result, mining (and on the flipside, bitcoin transactions) are sucking up greater and greater amounts of electricity. Bitcoin transactions now use so much energy that the electricity used for a single trade could power a home for almost a whole month, according to Dutch bank ING.

The bulk of Bitcoin "mining" is done in China, where energy costs are comparatively cheaper than in places like the UK or US.

"The top six biggest mining pools from Antpool to BTCC are all largely based in China," Mati Greenspan, an analyst with trading platform eToro, said in an email earlier this month. "Some rough estimates put China's hashpower at more than 80% of the total network."

However, there is growing concern about what the environmental impact of all this electric usage could be. Most of the electricity generated in China comes from CO2 emitting fossil fuels. Greenspan said: "We need to be mindful of how that energy is created."

You can see live data on the mining pools that are currently active at Blockchain.info.

Original author: Oscar Williams-Grut

Harsha K R/FlickrJust because a product gets the job done doesn't mean it's a one-trick pony.

In a recent AskReddit thread, people shared their favorite products that also pull double-duty as solutions to other problems (One caveat: we haven't actually tried these, so experiment at your own risk).

How many of these products have you found alternative uses for?

Original author: Chris Weller

Mars has suspended global advertising with Google after two investigations by the BBC and The Times found sexualised comments under videos of children.Volunteer moderators who flag inappropriate comments or suspected predator accounts told the publications they get little help from YouTube.The volunteers said they have no child protection training, and hand over data to the police.YouTube has taken measures to crack down on inappropriate content but acknowledged it has more to do.

YouTube is still failing to clean up inappropriate, sexualised comments left under videos featuring children, according to investigations by the BBC and The Times.

And Mars has suspended its global advertising with Google after The Times found its ads running against videos featuring children, with predatory comments beneath.

YouTube reportedly relies on a handful of volunteers to clean up comments made by sexual predators — with one commenter encouraging a young YouTuber who posted a prank video of himself taking a cold shower to "try not to wear black boxers."

Other predators apparently leave requests related to sexual fetishes under videos featuring children, though the videos themselves may be perfectly innocent in their subject matter.

The allegations were made by people who work for free to flag up inappropriate YouTube content, known as "trusted flaggers." These people are not employed directly by YouTube, but have access to more tools to flag up comments or videos to YouTube's teams.

According to flaggers speaking to the BBC and The Times, YouTube has given little support, instead leaving the volunteers to comb through thousands of inappropriate comments and hand them over to US police. The Times report claimed the flaggers had flagged 12,000 accounts belonging to suspected predators, but an estimated 50,000 remain on the service.

One flagged is quoted as saying: "It should not be our responsibility alone to investigate and liaise with law enforcement.

"YouTube's teams should be the ones actively passing this through their established channels with the National Center for Missing and Exploited Children and other law enforcement agencies to reduce this kind of illegal activity."

According to the BBC, the online form where users can flag up inappropriate content appears to have a flaw too. The form apparently is missing associated links, meaning a YouTube staffer can see a report has been made, but has no idea which comment has been flagged up.

The timing could hardly be worse for YouTube, which held its annual Brandcast event for advertisers on Thursday evening in London.

Mars suspended its global advertising with Google after the Times investigation, which found ads appearing against videos showing half-dressed young girls. While the videos were innocent, they reportedly had several predatory comments beneath. The Times also found ads for Amazon, eBay, and Deutsche Bank appearing against similar videos. The brands said they would investigate immediately.

The reports come just a day after YouTube claimed it was cleaning up its act around inappropriate content relating to children. The site said it would suspend comments left under videos featuring children if there were any signs of inappropriate commenting. It's also clamping down on videos that appear to show the mistreatment of children.

 

YouTube sent the following statement to Business Insider:

"Content that endangers children is abhorrent and unacceptable to us. We have clear policies against videos and comments on YouTube which sexualise or exploit children and we enforce them aggressively whenever alerted to such content. We have recently toughened our approach to videos and comments featuring children which may not be illegal, but give cause for concern. In just the past week we've disabled comments on thousands of videos that we've identified as of potential interest to predators and shut down hundreds of accounts identified as making predatory comments. We are committed to getting this right and recognise we need to do more, both through machine learning and by increasing human and technical resources."

Original author: Shona Ghosh

An environmental start-up in Indonesia is trying to tackle the country's plastic problem.Evoware has made a form of 'edible glass' that is made from seaweed.The glasses can come in different flavours such as peppermint and green tea.Indonesia produces 10 million tonnes of seaweed every year. 

 

Jakarta food and beverages retailer Ong Tek Tjan sells ice cream in cups his customers can eat afterwards, instead of throwing away - they are made from seaweed and taste like jelly, in flavours from peppermint to green tea.

Indonesian start-up Evoware, which makes the cups, as well as other containers, from farmed seaweed free of chemicals, is relying on its biodegradable alternative to plastic packaging to reduce contamination of the environment.

"I too support this environment-friendly cause," said vendor Ong, who uses Evoware's Ello Jello container to serve ice cream, though he feels consumers may take time to adapt to the product that is pricier than current options.

Indonesia, which has some of the world's filthiest rivers and once-pristine beaches littered with plastic waste, has joined a United Nations-led clean-up drive after being rated the second-biggest plastic marine polluter, behind China.

Evoware co-founder David Christian said the idea of seaweed-based edible packaging was spurred by his desire to fight an explosion in plastic waste over the last few years in his home city of Jakarta, Indonesia's capital of 10 million people.

"I saw how much plastic waste is produced here, which takes hundreds or thousands of years to degrade and contaminates everything," Christian added.

From the first product it developed, the seaweed-based jelly cup, Evoware is expanding into other types of packaging, such as dissolvable sachets for coffee or seasonings.

Indonesia produces 10 million tonnes of seaweed each year and targets 19 million tonnes by 2020, said Christian.

But Evoware's products, now made by hand, still have some way to go before they can compete with plastic on price.

The edible seaweed Ello Jello cone can be up to five times more expensive than ordinary crepe cones, according to Ong. And it uses wrappings of plastic and paper to preserve its texture.

"I hope in future the packaging could be better and not use plastic," said one customer, Vince Lantang Helda.

Produced by Jasper Pickering.

Original author: Jasper Pickering and Reuters

U.S. Attorney General Jeff Sessions holds a news conference to announce an 'international cybercrime enforcement action' at the Department of Justice July 20, 2017 in Washington, DC. Chip Somodevilla/Getty Images

DoJ looking for a case of "pure fraud" to prosecute, according to former crypto "tsar." SEC has already taken action and scrutiny of the initial coin offering space is intensifying globally.

LONDON — The US Department of Justice (DoJ) is considering taking action against "initial coin offerings" (ICOs), according to a report in the Financial Times.

Kathryn Haun, a former federal prosecutor who was the DoJ's first crypto "tsar", told the FT that the watchdog is looking closely at the space and considering bringing its first case.

Haun, who sits on the board of trading platform Coinbase, said she believes the DoJ will pick a case that's "pure fraud or a blatant and wanton violation of securities laws rather than a situation that may be a closer call." This would give the prosecutor a high chance of success and send a warning to the rest of the sector.

The US Securities and Exchange Commission charged a man and two companies for operating fraudulent initial coin offerings in September, the first known action in the space from US regulators.

ICO is a fundraising method that has exploded in popularity so far this year. Startups issue digital coins or tokens in exchange for real money that they use to build their business. The tokens can then be redeemed for goods or services that the startup develops in the future. Over $3 billion has been raised by over 1,000 issuances in 2017.

Funderbeam

However, regulators around the world are wary of ICOs, which many see as simply securities issuances masquerading as something else to avoid regulation.

China and South Korea have banned ICOs and regulators from the US and UK have repeatedly warned investors that ICOs are high-risk and unproven.

Original author: Oscar Williams-Grut

10 things in tech you need to know today, November 24 - Business Insider

Original author: James Cook

<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"????>

Cancan Chu/Getty Images

China has created a website for vigilante citizens to report distorted headlines and harmful information about its military.  The website also invites the public to report military leaks.  China previously created software that automatically reports if a soldier leaks secret information or uses "sensitive words" online. Strict cyber-security laws are growing in China, where citizens' online activity is closely monitored. 

China launched a new website this week where citizens can report leaks and fake news about the military.

The move is consistent with China's internet censorship laws, which are some of the strictest in the world.

Chinese state media reported the website, China Army Network Report Platform, "accepts tip-offs about people who pretend to be military personnel on social media, malicious posts about the People's Liberation Army, or leaks of potentially classified information."

But China's military site, 81.cn, says the platform takes submissions of violations including "harmful information" or "distorting the headlines" about China's military, "systemically editing original news" about the military, and reports "attacking" or "distorting and deconstructing the history" of the Communist Party. 

The website was created to implement the "guiding spirit" of China's Congress in order to create a "clean and bright cyber-military space," and also accepts reports on illegal internet use by military members, including members opening unauthorized social media accounts.

President Xi Jinping said earlier this year that "strengthening cyber-defense and deterrence capabilities" is one of China's top priorities. And after  China’s top cybersecurity officials pledged complete loyalty to party leadership it was widely expected that more crackdowns would occur.

China has long tried to monitor its own military

Closely monitoring the activities of its military personnel has been longstanding policy in China.

In 2016, a long-term ban on Chinese military personnel using social media was lifted,  but the military urged soldiers to use encrypted mobile programs or military internet cafes.

Earlier this year, China developed software that immediately alerts authorities if a soldier leaks sensitive data, reported the state run  Global Times. The software, which can be enabled remotely, can also restrict hours of use and "screen for sensitive words."

Internet connected wearables, like smart watches, are also banned in order to prevent leaks, according to an NBC news report. 

Chinese citizens face major consequences for leaking sensitive military information.

In 2016, one man was sentenced to death for leaking more than 150,000 classified documents to an unidentified foreign power, Reuters reported. 

Internet surveillance for ordinary citizens is the norm

China has been ramping up its censorship and surveillance of the internet in recent years.

In 2013, The Beijing News reported that China had 2 million people working as "public opinion analysts" which involved monitoring public opinion online. 

Sweeping cybersecurity laws came into effect in June 2017. Both local and international companies must store user data in China and submit to government spot checks.

State news agency Xinhua has since reported there are more than 1000 "Internet police offices" across the country, helping "investigate illegal information" and "collect information from the public."

Original author: Rosie Perper

The Revolut app. Revolut

Revolut now has over 1 million users just over two years after launch. Index Ventures' Jan Hammer says the key to its success is a great product and low-fee model.

LONDON — Fast-growing fintech app Revolut has passed 1 million customers just over two years after launch.

Revolut announced the milestone on Friday, saying that customers have now completed 42 million transactions on its app worth a combined $6 billion (£4.5 billion). The company began as a foreign exchange app linked to a pre-paid card but has since branched out into broader financial services, such as current accounts, insurance, and investments.

The customer milestone puts Revolut ahead of other European rivals such as UK-based Monzo, which has 400,000 customers, and German-headquartered N26, which has over 500,000 users across Europe. All are in a race to build a global, app-only bank that hopes to win over a new generation of millennial customers.

Revolut, which is applying for a full European banking license, said that 42% of its customers are aged 25-35, "a clear indication that traditional banks are no longer meeting the needs of younger, tech-savvy generations."

Index Ventures partner Jan Hammer. Index Ventures

Jan Hammer, a partner at venture capital firm Index Ventures, which has backed Revolut, told Business Insider that Revolut's "product elegance" has helped to fuel its rapid growth.

"First and foremost, Revolut has built a great product, a great product that has a phenomenal product-market fit, that clearly satisfies the needs of hundreds of thousands of users in a really frictionless way," he said.

Launched in July 2015, Revolut has quickly become one of the hottest fintech startups in the world thanks to its rapid growth. The company has raised over $85 million (£64.1 million) from investors to date and claims to be signing up 3,000 to 3,500 new customers across Europe per day. It plans to launch in North America next year.

One of the appeals for customers is Revolut's lower money changing costs compared to traditional foreign exchange brokers. The company was founded by Nikolay Storonsky, a former FX trader with Credit Suisse who felt he was being overcharged when travelling abroad.

Hammer said: "The user loves the no-frills, no fees model for both the banking part and the foreign exchange model, a market that's historically been burdened by huge fees to the tune of up to 5%.

"Revolut has been at the forefront of eliminating these fees. I would draw the similarity with Robinhood — the upfront fee to transact has been eliminated."

Robinhood, another Index Ventures investment, is a US-based stock trading app that charges no brokerage fees and makes money through margin trading loans instead.

"In both cases, it's been zero [customer] acquisition costs," Hammer said. "Referrals, wait lists, peer-to-peer recommendations, social sharing — the list goes on and on, but non-traditional, non-paid user acquisition channels that are resulting in, in both cases, huge user and transaction growth."

Revolut emailed customers last week asking for help getting to 1 million customers by advertising the service to their friends on Facebook, just one example of how it has relied on viral marketing for growth.

Nikolay Storonsky, cofounder and CEO of Revolut. Revolut

CEO Nikolay Storonsky told BI recently that many staff "work at least 12, 13 hours a day. All the key people, all the core team. A lot of people also work on weekends."

Asked if he was worried about the sustainability of this culture, Hammer told BI: "In general, passion and intensity and commitment and hard work are synonymous with ambition and disruption and building a startup. Culture being described as intense, hard-working is not something that's foreign to many other ambitious, venture-backed companies."

Many fintech market watchers see a rivalry between Revolut and TransferWise, an international money transfer business that is also backed by Index Ventures. TransferWise announced plans for an international currency card earlier this year, a move that was seen by many as a direct response to Revolut's popularity.

"Both of those companies satisfy a slightly different use case," Hammer said. "They are obviously aware of each other. They are pursuing somewhat different use cases."

Read BI's full recent interview with Revolut founder Storonsky on the company's rapid growth.

Original author: Oscar Williams-Grut

Customers are slamming Walmart after items from TVs to clothing ran out of stock online. Walmart kicked off its online Black Friday sale at 12:01 a.m. on Thanksgiving Day. The retailer has tripled its online assortment this year — but it needs to keep items in stock if it wants to compete with Amazon. 

 

Some customers are furious at Walmart after the retailer ran out of Black Friday sales items on Thanksgiving Day. 

"What's the point in having online black Friday if everything is either out of stock or in store purchase only?" reads one comment on Walmart's Facebook page on Thursday.

Another reads: "Why is it that many of the sale items in the black Friday ad that are supposed to be available all day today are not online?!?! This is ridiculous and the worst crap walmart has pulled yet!" 

"Nothing is in stock online and store selection sucks," reads a third. 

Twitter leeburt

Walmart's Black Friday sales started online at midnight on Thursday morning. By Thursday evening, many of the items were sold out. 

Twitter rschineis

Items that were out of stock ranged from electronics such as the advertised Sharp Smart LED TV, to best-selling clothing such as Wrangler jeans, kids' pajamas, and fleece jackets, to a wide range of video games. 

Twitter CassIsReal

A number of people are also reporting that they ordered items from Walmart early on Thursday morning, and were told later in the day that the items had sold out and they would not receive them. 

Twitter earnwithash

It's possible that Walmart will restock these items online, either at sales prices or at higher costs. Walmart did not immediately respond to Business Insider's request for comment. 

In any case, restocking later doesn't prevent customers' anger now — or help Walmart compete with Amazon. 

Walmart made a major investment in its online shopping business this year, with perks like free two-day shipping on orders of greater than $35. The retailer announced earlier in November that it has tripled its online assortment for the holidays when compared to a year ago, including doubling its toy offerings. 

The ability to keep these items in stock online is crucial for Walmart if it wants to compete with Amazon. While Amazon's prices often skyrocket on popular items, it rarely truly runs out of stock thanks to its extensive range of third-party retailers who also sell items on the site. 

Original author: Kate Taylor

The iPhone X is a beautiful, deeply flawed device. Hollis Johnson

The iPhone X is beautiful and exciting. The phone has one crucial flaw, however — it's nearly impossible to use with just one hand. The difficulty has changed the way I use my phone for the worse, so I'm selling mine.

 

I still remember the feeling of excitement I had peeling back the protective plastic from the my shiny new iPhone X. What a gorgeous piece of technology.

That feeling didn’t last.

I’m now nearly a month into using the iPhone X, and I’ve slowly realized I unreservedly dislike the device. In fact, I hate using it.

I could rattle off a list of complaints, like how FaceID is inconsistent, the bright chrome the metal casing is scratch-prone, and the price tag is astronomical.

There's a fatal flaw. 

But there’s really only one flaw that really matters to me: the phone is impossible for me to use with one hand.

The top of the red arc marks the natural limit of my thumb's reach. Business Insider/Dennis Green

Though the phone's footprint is only a bit bigger than the one of the iPhone 6, 7, and 8, the bigger screen 

The new gestures required by the notch mean there’s no way to look at my notifications with only one hand, or access the control center. Those are pretty essential functions, and it drastically limits the usability of the phone when I’m on the go, or when I only have one hand free.

I've noticed myself actually changing my behavior to try and use the phone, holding it differently and constantly changing my grip by sliding my hand up the back of the device trying to reach the top of the screen with my thumb.

With my hand closer to the top of the device, I feel like I'm going to drop it. That causes me to instinctively bring the phone down and horizontal, parallel to the floor and near my stomach. This puts the phone in an awkward position, forcing me to crane my neck.

The entire top two rows of apps on the home screen are basically inaccessible without this sliding move, and it makes me paranoid I'm going to drop the $1,000 device. 

I've also noticed a new habit of bringing in my left hand when I'm using the phone nearly all the time. It rests near the top left corner of the device, tapping back arrows or notifications as needed. 

With my previous iPhone, the 6, I was able to use my pinky as a kind of shelf for the phone to sit on as I tapped away, composing text messages, checking email, or changing the songs played on Spotify. The X's size doesn't let that happen.

I've enabled Reachability, Apple's solution for small handedness on larger phones. It doesn't help much. The feature is triggered with a downward swipe on the bottom edge of the screen, which is both an awkward motion and also makes me feel like I'm losing grip on the device. It also adds another step to using anything near the top of the phone.

The fear of dropping the phone comes from the $549 repair bill that comes along with cracking the back glass of the phone. I hate the idea of risking that just trying to see my notifications. 

I envied people with the old iPhone. 

At first, I thought it was just an adjustment period — not dissimilar to the feeling of melancholy one gets just after getting married.  I experienced something similar with my previous phone.

The 6 represented a similar dramatic departure in form factor from previous iPhones, similar to the X's new shape. When I upgraded to the 6 from my iPhone 4S, I was struck with similar doubts about one-handed use, and it took me a while to get used to.

However, my hand did get used to it in a few weeks, and I ended up falling totally in love with the phone. A month later, that same thing did not happen with the X.

I had assumed using the new phone would be basically identical to using my previous phone, but I didn't account for how the larger screen size would drastically affect my ability to use it.

A weird thing happened: I saw people with older iPhone devices and actually envied them. How easy they looked to use, how flawless the TouchID was, the more manageable size. When a friend showed me her new iPhone 8, I felt legitimate pangs of jealousy.

Eventually, I realized the phone would never work for me.

I realized, with an air of sadness, that I needed to get rid of it. The screen and size are just too big to use with one hand. It’s not comfortable, and I don't think it ever will be. And the form factor isn’t big enough to comfortably use two hands all the time.

The iPhone X — not for those with small hands. Hollis Johnson

I've never had an Apple product that refused to bend to my will with such stubbornness. I realized I don't really need to be on the cutting edge of technology with a gorgeous screen and bleeding edge facial recognition — I just need a phone that works for me.

A phone shouldn't be this difficult to use. 

A phone should adapt to a user — not the other way around. I have no doubt that the phone would work perfectly for someone with larger hands. 

If the iPhone X is the future of the smartphone, I'd rather be left behind. I'll be selling my iPhone X, and invest in the tried-and-true form factor of the iPhone 8 instead.

Original author: Dennis Green

<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"????>

Original author: Dennis Green

<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"????>

Original author: Kate Taylor

Original author: Mark Matousek

Original author: Matthew DeBord

Original author: Chris Weller

Proponents of net neutrality protest against Federal Communication Commission Chairman Ajit Pai outside the American Enterprise Institute before his arrival May 5, 2017 in Washington, DC. Chip Somodevilla/Getty Images

Business Insider asked some of the biggest tech firms in the US about the FCC's plans to kill net neutrality. Netflix, Facebook, Google and more are all speaking out in support of net neutrality, and against the FCC's plans.

The FCC is planning to kill net neutrality — and some tech companies are starting to speak out.

In December, the US telecoms regulator is planning to roll-back Obama-era rules that ensure net neutrality — the principle that all data must be treated equally, and companies can't charge for preferential access.

The plan is expected to pass, and if it does, it will mean ISPs and telecoms firms are able to charge companies for access to "fast lanes," or even block certain apps altogether.

Pro-net neutrality activists, who argue the principle creates a level playing-field online, are up in arms about the plan. And some tech companies are now speaking out in support of net neutrality as well, from Facebook to Netflix.

Business Insider reached out to some of the biggest tech firms in America today to ask for their reaction to the FCC's plan. Their initial responses are below, and we will continue to update this post as more come in.

Facebook: Net neutrality ensures 'the internet remains open for everyone'

In an emailed statement, Facebook's vice-president of US public policy Erin Egan said: "We are disappointed that the proposal announced today by the FCC fails to maintain the strong net neutrality protections that will ensure the internet remains open for everyone. We will work with all stakeholders committed to this principle."

Google: 'We are disappointed'

A Google spokesperson says: "The FCC’s net neutrality rules are working well for consumers and we’re disappointed in the proposal announced today."

Federal Communications Commission Chairman Ajit Pai arrives for his confirmation hearing for a second term as chair of the commission before the Senate Commerce, Science and Transportation Committee in the Dirksen Senate Office Building on Capitol Hill July 19, 2017 in Washington, DC. Chip Somodevilla/Getty Images

Netflix: 'We oppose the FCC's proposal'

In a tweet sent on Tuesday, video-streaming giant Netflix signaled its support of net neutrality and its opposition to the FCC's plans.

Says Netflix:

"Netflix supports strong #NetNeutrality. We oppose the FCC's proposal to roll back these core protections." In response to a Twitter using calling for it to take action, it added: "We've been supporting for years thru IA and Day to Save Net Neutrality with a banner on Netflix homepage for all users. More info in Q4 2016 earnings letter, as well. This current draft order hasn't been officially voted, so we're lodging our opposition publicly and loudly now."

The company did not immediately respond to Business Insider's request for additional comment.

Reddit: Net neutrality is 'crucial to innovation'

The Reddit community is fiercely pro-net neutrality, and has been up in arms about the plans. Most of the top posts on the social news and community site right now are calls to arms, or highly critical messages targeting the FCC.

The company itself is also pro-net neutrality.

In a statement, a Reddit spokesperson said:

"Reddit is actively monitoring the FCC's proposed rule changes that could dismantle net neutrality as we know it. From farmers in South Dakota to musicians in Kentucky to small business owners in Utah, net neutrality is just as important to redditors as it is to Reddit and we will continue to advocate for and work constructively to maintain a free and open Internet. It is crucial to innovation and the health of our economy that small businesses have equal access to the internet, with winners and losers chosen by consumers, not ISPs."

Internet Association: The proposal 'defies the will of millions of Americans'

The Internet Association, an industry body whose members include Amazon, Dropbox, Ebay, Facebook, Google, LinkedIn, Microsoft, Spotify, Uber, and others, put out a statement on Tuesday criticizing the plans. It said:

"Chairman Pai’s proposal, if implemented, represents the end of net neutrality as we know it and defies the will of millions of Americans who support the 2015 Open Internet Order. This proposal undoes nearly two decades of bipartisan agreement on baseline net neutrality principles that protect Americans’ ability to access the entire internet.

"The 2015 Order created bright-line, enforceable net neutrality protections that guarantee consumers access to the entire internet and preserve competition online. This proposal fails to achieve any of these objectives. Consumers have little choice in their ISP, and service providers should not be allowed to use this gatekeeper position at the point of connection to discriminate against websites and apps.

“Internet Association and our members will continue our work to ensure net neutrality protections remain the law of the land."

Oracle: Declined to comment

Enterprise tech giant Oracle declined to comment when reached by email.

Salesforce: Reitereated the Internet Association's position

Salesforce, a member of the Internet Association, directed Business Insider to the industry body's statement when reached for comment.

Apple, Twitter, Cisco, and IBM did not immediately respond to Business Insider's request for comment. We will update this story as we hear back.

Original author: Rob Price

Bank of America’s commitment to digital is undeniable. Like USAA, Bank of America gained points for offering its 23 million mobile users rare features, such as cardless ATM access, the ability to re-order or disable a payment card in-app, and the ability to alert the bank to travel plans. Bank of America tied with Wells Fargo for first place in the security section, and tied for third overall. Rank: 3rd (tie). Overall score: 73 out of 100 points. Citibank is reinventing itself as a digital-first bank. Citi is in the midst of a fundamental digital transformation — it launched 86 digital features in 2016, and is on track to deploy 800 more in 2017. The volume of features offered by the bank, including its range of biometric login options and the ability to order a replacement card via mobile banking, helped set it apart in this benchmark. Citi received top marks in the wallets section of the scorecard, thanks to its innovative mobile wallet Citi Pay, and tied for third overall. Rank: 3rd (tie). Overall score: 73 out of 100 points. Capital One is pioneering next-generation digital banking experiences. Known for its commitment to a superior user experience, Capital One rounded out the top five in this scorecard with cutting-edge features that position it for the future of digital banking. Specifically, Capital One offers a conversational SMS chatbot and an integration with Amazon’s Echo device for voice-based banking. The bank tied with Wells Fargo and Citi for first in the wallets category of the scorecard, scored highest for social, and came in fifth overall. Rank: 5th. Overall score: 72 out of 100 points.

BI Intelligence's Mobile Banking Competitive Edge study ranks banks according to strength of their mobile offerings and offers analysis on what banks need to do to win and retain customers. The study is based on an August benchmark of what features the 15 top US banks offer, and a dedicated September 2017 study of 1,100 consumers on the importance of 32 cutting edge features in choosing a bank.

The full report will be available to BI Intelligence enterprise clients in November. To learn more about this report, email Senior Account Executive Chris Roth (This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it.).  BI Intelligence's Mobile Banking Competitive Edge study includes: Bank of America, BB&T, Capital One, Chase, Citibank, Fifth Third, HSBC, Key Bank, Navy Federal Credit Union, PNC, SunTrust, TD, US Bank, USAA, and Wells Fargo.

Original author: Dan Van Dyke