Summary of “Man Allegedly Used Change Of Address Form To Move UPS Headquarters To His Apartment”

Man Allegedly Used Change Of Address Form To Move UPS Headquarters To His Apartment : The Two-Way Prosecutors say he received thousands of pieces of mail intended for the company, including checks and corporate credit cards.
Dushaun Henderson-Spruce submitted a U.S. Postal Service change of address form on Oct. 26, 2017, according to court documents.
He requested changing a corporation’s mailing address from an address in Atlanta to the address of his apartment on Chicago’s North Side.
The post office duly updated the address, and Henderson-Spruce allegedly began receiving the company’s mail – including checks.
The corporation isn’t named in the court documents, but the Chicago Tribune reports that it’s the shipping company UPS. In a statement to NPR, UPS said it “Was notified that some U.S. mail, intended for UPS employees at the company’s headquarters address, was redirected by an unauthorized change of address by a third party. The U.S. Postal Service corrected the issue and the USPS Postal Inspector is investigating the incident.”
For nearly three months, mail addressed to UPS’s corporate headquarters was forwarded to Henderson-Spruce’s apartment.
On Jan. 25, postal inspectors searched Henderson-Spruce’s apartment in Chicago’s Rogers Park neighborhood and found about 3,000 pieces of mail addressed to the company in Atlanta, court documents say.
The Tribune spoke briefly with Henderson-Spruce outside his apartment building and reported that he “Hinted that he’d received the UPS mail as a result of a mix-up that was not his fault and that his identity may have been stolen, but he declined to elaborate.”

The orginal article.

Summary of “Killing Strategy: The Disruption Of Management Consulting”

The strategy industry is worth $250B, and the value of strategy is obvious to every company, from the smallest startup to the biggest Fortune 500.
Ironically, with this new business model, the company found that management consulting firms – often hungry for very specific, niche expertise – were some of its best customers.
Clients judge whether or not the solution will be good based on indirect signals: the consulting firm’s brand and prestige, the specific domain of knowledge required to solve the problem, and the company’s prior experience with that firm and consultants in general.
Over the years, we’ve seen companies move from hiring consultants to building out entire strategy functions inside their company – teams, staffed by ex-consultants and others, who can perform the role of a management consultant internally.
“We know that many companies have hired small armies of former consultants for internal strategy groups and management functions, which contributes to the companies’ increasing sophistication about consulting services Typically these people are, not surprisingly, demanding taskmasters who reduce the scope of work they outsource to consultancies and adopt a more activist role in selecting and managing the resources assigned to their projects.”
If companies are hiring ex-consultants to do strategy, and working less with the big consulting firms, it would certainly spell a recipe for disruption.
Today, the wide availability of tools that help companies collect and analyze huge amounts of data, on-demand domain experts, and previously “Black-boxed” consulting resources and ex-consultants have taken a chunk out of the strategic value proposition of the big management consultancies.
That’s not a problem that necessitates a McKinsey-level of involvement – and the company can probably get just as good results by working with a pricing expert sourced through somewhere like BTG. Smaller generalist consulting firms might have trouble competing with the possible disruption factors outlined above.

The orginal article.

Summary of “The spectacular power of Big Lens”

The lenses in my glasses – and yours too, most likely – are made by Essilor, a French multinational that controls almost half of the world’s prescription lens business and has acquired more than 250 other companies in the past 20 years.
“You have to be not only courageous,” said Chemello, of the transaction, “But a little bit crazy.” Luxottica bought US Shoe for $1.4bn. Once the deal was done, Del Vecchio promptly broke up US Shoe, whose roots went back to 1879, until all that was left were the LensCrafters stores that he wanted in the first place, which he proceeded to fill with Luxottica frames.
Some opticians call Essilor “The Big E”. The company boasts of supplying between 300,000 and 400,000 stores around the world – three or four times as many as Luxottica.
If Luxottica has spent the last quarter of a century buying up the most conspicuous elements of the optical business then Essilor has busied itself in the invisible parts, acquiring lens manufacturers, instrument makers, prescription labs and the science of sight itself.
Within the industry, the Big E is generally considered less rapacious than Del Vecchio’s Luxottica; people regard it instead as a kind of unstoppable, enveloping tide.
“With Luxottica, it’s just lip service. It is all about domination.” The most infamous Luxottica deals carried an edge of brutality.
In the summer of 2004, as he approached his 70th birthday, Luxottica’s founder handed over day-to-day control of the company to Andrea Guerra, a young chief executive he hired from Indesit, the Italian white goods company.
According to several senior figures at Luxottica, Del Vecchio came to believe that folding Luxottica into Essilor was the best way for his work to endure, and informal talks between the two companies began.

The orginal article.

Summary of “The Last Days of the Blue-Blood Harvest”

Horseshoe crab blood runs blue and opaque, like antifreeze mixed with milk.
So reliant is the modern biomedical industry on this blood that the disappearance of horseshoe crabs would instantly cripple it.
Ding, along with her husband and research partner Bow Ho, had come to horseshoe crabs circuitously, and their ultimate goal was to make the animals no longer necessary in biomedical research.
He settled on a protocol of injecting bacteria from seawater directly into horseshoe crabs, which cause their blood to clump into “Stringy masses.”
So Ding set out to make an alternative to LAL that eventually wouldn’t require horseshoe crabs at all.
The horseshoe crab’s sensitivity to bacterial toxins unfortunately also made it a pain to study.
Finally, a decade and a half after she began, Ding had an alternative to LAL that worked without harming any more horseshoe crabs.
It is an ancient synchrony between species, one that began long before humans began harvesting horseshoe crabs for blood and will hopefully last long after.

The orginal article.

Summary of “I am a data factory”

Am I a data mine, or am I a data factory? Is data extracted from me, or is data produced by me? Both metaphors are ugly, but the distinction between them is crucial.
If I am a data mine, then I am essentially a chunk of real estate, and control over my data becomes a matter of ownership.
Who owns me, and what happens to the economic value of the data extracted from me? Should I be my own owner – the sole proprietor of my data mine and its wealth? Should I be nationalized, my little mine becoming part of some sort of public collective? Or should ownership rights be transferred to a set of corporations that can efficiently aggregate the raw material from my mine and transform it into products and services that are useful to me? The questions raised here are questions of politics and economics.
Thinking of the platform companies as being in the extraction business, with personal data being analogous to a natural resource like iron or petroleum, brings a neatness and clarity to discussions of a new and complicated type of company.
We can use the recent data controversies to articulate a truly decentralised, emancipatory politics, whereby the institutions of the state will be deployed to recognise, create, and foster the creation of social rights to data.
When I upload a photo, I produce not only behavioral data but data that is itself a product.
I am, in other words, much more like a data factory than a data mine.
Beyond control of my data, the companies seek control of my actions, which to them are production processes, in order to optimize the efficiency, quality, and value of my data output.

The orginal article.

Summary of “Who’s Winning the Self-Driving Car Race?”

After interviewing executives and technology experts and reviewing announced plans, Bloomberg has taken a snapshot of the race to develop the self-driving car.
For the cars of tomorrow, Daimler works closely with Robert Bosch Gmbh and will be using a system from Silicon Valley intelligent computing company Nvidia Corp. The test cars can drive at Level 4 autonomy or even Level 5, which means the car doesn’t need a steering wheel or pedals to operate.
The same day in late November that GM showed off its self-driving Bolt in San Francisco, Zoox Inc. had its own car driving through the city’s winding streets and heavy traffic.
The company plans to have its car ready for passengers in 2020, Kaufman said, and then will work on getting passengers in the car shortly after.
Nissan’s ProPilot system stops the car if a vehicle ahead stops quickly and it keeps the car in its lane.
Audi, the luxury brand owned by Volkswagen AG, already has the most advanced autonomous car for sale in the A8. The car’s Traffic Jam Pilot uses Lidar to see the road and lets drivers go completely hands-free at speeds up to 37 miles per hour.
The company started developing self-parking technology in 1999 and installed it in the Prius in Japan in 2003, enabling the car to park with no input from the driver.
Its Pilot Assist gives a driver 15 seconds with hands off the wheel, keeping the car in lane and managing the distance to a vehicle ahead. The company is testing its technology with a few families in Gothenburg, Sweden.

The orginal article.

Summary of “Crypto Pioneers Head to Brooklyn to Reshape Finance”

The employees of ConsenSys Inc., the blockchain startup co-created by Ethereum guru Joseph Lubin, have taken over the space at 49 Bogart St. in the Bushwick neighborhood of Brooklyn, New York.
As ConsenSys spins off new ventures and attracts business partners, in Bushwick and adjacent Williamsburg, once part of New York City’s industrial heart, the crypto world has contributed to ongoing gentrification.
“There’s an energy here that you don’t find in Manhattan or anywhere else in New York,” said Tyler Clark, co-founder of blockchain developer Cryptonomic, which he started with a former colleague from JPMorgan Chase & Co. “ConsenSys is an inspiration to us.”
Though Manhattan has its own blockchain businesses, they’re more closely associated with established companies such as Microsoft Corp. and Intel Corp. than rebel Brooklyn would tolerate.
Brooklyn is planting its crypto-flag during New York’s Blockchain Week.
“This is the planting of the flag in Brooklyn for blockchain. Legacy finance is headquartered in Manhattan. Future finance is in Brooklyn.”
R3 designed its own blockchain, called Corda, and this year plans to launch a number of applications, including Tradewind, a gold-exchange company on the Corda blockchain; HQLA X, a securities-lending platform that recently had its first trade; and Fusion LenderComm, an application for syndicated lenders.
According to New York City’s Economic Development Corp., in 2015 there were 93 job openings listed for Brooklyn blockchain companies.

The orginal article.

Summary of “The new food: meet the startups racing to reinvent the meal”

Winning is crucial, he says, with his company Just in the vanguard of a new sector with an ambitious mission: to use cutting-edge technologies to create food that will take down the meat and dairy industries.
The way it is produced for the burger shows how the new food tech companies are harnessing techniques first developed for biomedical uses.
We want to hear from people working in the farming and food production industry around the world as we begin a new investigative series.
Even if the technology does develop to produce delicious, affordable and sustainable food, the potential “Yuk factor” of tech-created food hangs heavy over the embryonic sector.
Food journalist Joanna Blythman recently criticised the Impossible Burger: “It’s the very antithesis of local food with a transparent provenance and backstory. It’s patently the brainchild of a technocratic mindset, one brought to us by food engineers and scientists whose natural environment is the laboratory and the factory – not the kitchen, farm or field.”
Vonnie Estes, is now an independent food industry consultant but worked for Monsanto in the 1990s, when the company was excited about its what its new technology could do.
GM food has been eaten by hundreds of millions of people since, but Estes says: “There is still a huge group of people who do not want GMOs in their food. Thirty years ago we thought people will get over this quickly – they didn’t.”
Just, whose methodology was independently certified, says its current mayo and cookie products cut carbon emissions by at least 25% and water use by 75%. Impossible Foods says its burger, which replaces the meat with the heaviest carbon hoofprint, cuts greenhouse gases by 87%. Could this food could end up being dominated by a few tech giants? All these new foods are produced using techniques that are then patented by the companies to protect their investments, leading some critics to suggest a creeping privatisation of livestock could occur.

The orginal article.

Summary of “You Can’t Opt Out Of Sharing Your Data, Even If You Didn’t Opt In”

We’re used to thinking about privacy breaches as what happens when we give data about ourselves to a third party, and that data is then stolen from or abused by that third party.
“One of the fascinating things we’ve now walked ourselves into is that companies are valued by the market on the basis of how much user data they have,” said Daniel Kahn Gillmor, senior staff technologist with the ACLU’s Speech, Privacy and Technology Project.
The privacy of the commons is how the 270,000 Facebook users who actually downloaded the “Thisisyourdigitallife” app turned into as many as 87 million users whose data ended up in the hands of a political marketing firm.
Even if you do your searches from a specialized browser, tape over all your webcams and monitor your privacy settings without fail, your personal data has probably still been collected, stored and used in ways you didn’t intend – and don’t even know about.
The information collected every time they scan that loyalty card adds up to something like a medical history, which could later be sold to data brokers or combined with data bought from brokers to paint a fuller picture of a person who never consented to any of this.
The privacy of the commons means that, in some cases, your data is collected in ways you cannot reasonably prevent, no matter how carefully you or anyone you know behaves.
Our digital commons is set up to encourage companies and governments to violate your privacy.
Almost all of our privacy law and policy is framed around the idea of privacy as a personal choice, Cohen said.

The orginal article.

Summary of “China’s Tech Industry Wants Youth, Not Experience”

Almost immediately, readers seized on his age: At 42, he would have already been considered too old to be an engineer in China, where three-quarters of tech workers are younger than 30, according to China’s largest jobs website, Zhaopin.com.
The idealization of youth is in the DNA of the American tech industry.
In China the discrimination begins even younger than in the U.S. The irony is that most of the country’s famous tech companies were started by men older than 30.
China has used tech advancements to propel its economy forward for decades, but President Xi Jinping’s Made in China 2025 plan kicked activity into a higher gear.
In a country of 1.4 billion people, many Chinese tech companies are able to move faster than their overseas rivals by throwing people at a problem, and younger workers cost less than their more experienced colleagues.
A recent job posting for a front-end developer at a Beijing tech startup explained that the company is willing to relax its requirements for educational attainment but not for age; a college degree isn’t strictly necessary, but if you’re older than 30, don’t bother applying.
“Working in tech is like being a professional athlete,” says Robin Chan, an entrepreneur and angel investor in companies such as Xiaomi and Twitter Inc. “You work extremely hard from 20 to 40 years old and hope you hit it big. After that, it’s time to move on to something else and let someone younger try their hand.”
He, the tech recruiter, remains hopeful that age discrimination will eventually disappear in China.

The orginal article.