Hitting the Books: That time San Francisco’s suburbs sued the airport for being too loud

San Francisco has long sought to square its deeply-held progressive ideals with the region’s need for tangible, technological progress. SFO international airport, which opened for business in 1959 and has undergone significant expansion and modernizati…

Meta takes Ukraine’s controversial Azov Regiment off its dangerous organizations list

Facebook parent company Meta has removed the Azov Regiment, a controversial unit within the Ukrainian National Guard with alleged far-right political leanings, from its list of dangerous individuals and organizations. The move, first reported by The Ky…

Roku’s Streaming Stick 4K is on sale for $25, plus all the Cyber Week deals you can still get

Black Friday and Cyber Monday may be behind us, but many of the deals are still live as of today. A few deals even popped up after the shopping holidays ended, keeping our deals radar from getting rusty. Samsung still has a few good discounts including…

FTC asks court to hold Martin Shkreli in contempt for launching new drug company

Martin Shkreli, whom you may know as “Pharma Bro,” launched a new company last year called “Druglike, Inc.” Now, the Federal Trade Commission (FTC) has asked a federal judge to hold him in contempt for failing to cooperate with the agency in its investigation to determine whether launching the company violates his lifetime industry ban. US District Court Judge Denise Cote imposed a lifetime ban on Shkreli that prohibits him from participating in the pharmaceutical industry early last year. Cote ruled that the former pharma exec orchestrated an illegal anticompetitive scheme to gain a monopoly over Daraprim, a life-saving anti-malarial and anti-parasitic drug. 

After Shkreli’s former company, Turing Pharmaceuticals, obtained the manufacturing license for Daraprim, it raised the drug’s prices from $17.50 to $750 per tablet. Cote sided with the FTC in the antitrust lawsuit the agency filed against Shkreli in 2020 and ordered him to pay $64.6 million in damages, in addition to imposing a lifetime industry ban against him. Prior to Druglike’s launch, Shkreli tried (and failed) to convince a judge to put the ban on hold, arguing that the public could benefit from his future contributions to the industry. Shkreli challenged the ban while he was serving time in federal prison after receiving a seven-year sentence in 2017 for defrauding investors. He was released from prison in May.

The FTC said it started asking Shkreli for a compliance report and access to relevant records, as well as asking him to sit for an interview regarding Druglike, in October 2022. However, the company co-founder kept on disregarding its “repeated requests.” The agency also said that Shkreli has yet to pay any amount of his $64.6 million fine. It’s now asking the court to order Shkreli to comply with its information requests within 21 days of its decision. 

In a press release (PDF) for its launch, Druglike described itself as “a Web3 drug discovery software platform.” The company said it’s building a “decentralized computing network” that “provides resources for anyone looking to start or contribute to early-stage drug discovery projects.” In a statement, Shkreli said “Druglike will remove barriers to early-stage drug discovery, increase innovation and allow a broader group of contributors to share the rewards.”

Google lays off most employees part of its Area 120 incubator

Google’s Area 120 division has been severely affected by the layoffs happening across Alphabet, according to Bloomberg and TechCrunch, which said the unit now has fewer than 100 employees after the most recent round of cuts. Area 120 is known as Google’s in-house incubator, which works on experimental apps and products. Those include GameSnacks, an HTML5-based platform that enables users to load and play games quickly even on poor connections and basic smartphones. Sundar Pichai established the division in 2016 to “provide a purpose-built home for bottom-up innovation at Google.” The division’s website reads: “Area 120 teams work on new products, experiences, and services every day.”

Alphabet recently admitted that it was cutting 12,000 jobs, which is around six percent of its global workforce. The layoffs “cut across Alphabet, product areas, functions, levels and regions,” but it’s bound to affect certain divisions more than others, seeing as the company performed “a rigorous review… to ensure that [its] people and roles are aligned with [its] highest priorities as a company.”

A spokesperson told Bloomberg that the company has “made the difficult decision to wind down the majority of the Area 120 team.” TechCrunch says the division typically works on 20 projects at any given time, but only three will “graduate” or will be folded into Google later this year. Almost everyone who isn’t involved in those three projects has reportedly lost their jobs. 

During a round of cuts at Area 120 back in September, a Google spokesperson said that the division is “shifting its focus to projects that build on Google’s deep investment in AI and have the potential to solve important user problems.” It’s unclear if any of the three “graduating” projects are AI-related or if the remaining team members are working on anything artificial intelligence. According to a recent New York Times report, though, Google is gearing up to show off at least 20 AI-powered products and a chatbot for search this year.

Elon Musk defends ‘funding secured’ tweets in Tesla shareholder trial

Elon Musk said that just because he tweets something, it “does not mean people believe it or will act accordingly.” The Tesla chief took the witness stand in a San Francisco federal court to defend himself (and the tweets he made back in 2018) in a lawsuit filed by a group of the automaker’s shareholders. “I think you can absolutely be truthful but can you be comprehensive? Of course not,” he added, regarding Twitter’s character limits. If you’ll recall, Musk famously tweeted in August 2018 that he was “considering taking Tesla private at $420” and that he was already able to secure funding. “Investor support is confirmed,” he said in a follow-up tweet.

The CEO later revealed that he was in talks with Saudi Arabia’s Public Investment Fund, which reportedly expressed interest in Tesla as part of the country’s bid to lessen its reliance on oil. However, the deal didn’t materialize, and he later penned a lengthy post on the automaker’s website to say that it’s staying public. 

As CNBC notes, shareholders blamed those “funding secured” tweets for their significant financial losses, leading them to file a class action lawsuit against Musk. Tesla’s shares apparently remained highly volatile in the weeks that followed. The executive, however, downplayed his tweets’ impact and said that they don’t necessarily affect stock prices: “There have been many cases where I thought that if I were to tweet something, the stock price would go down. For example, at one point I tweeted that I thought that, in my opinion, the stock price was too high…and it went went higher, which was, which is, you know, counterintuitive.”

In addition to the shareholder lawsuit, the Securities and Exchange Commission sued Musk over his tweets, calling them “false and misleading statements” that could be constituted as fraud. Musk and Tesla paid $20 million each to settle with the SEC, and the executive had to step down as board chairman. The SEC also required company lawyers to approve any Tesla-related tweet Musk makes — a condition the CEO tried (and failed) to get out of last year. 

Aside from defending his tweets, Musk criticized short sellers during his testimony, telling the court that short-selling “should be made illegal.” He added: “It is a means for, in my opinion, bad people on Wall Street to steal money from investors. Not good.” Another piece of information to take away from his time on the witness stand is that nobody can tell Musk to stop tweeting. When lawyers asked him about the advice he got to refrain from posting on Twitter after calling a British cave diver a “pedo guy,” Musk said: “I continued to tweet, yes.”

According to Reuters, Musk only testified for less than 30 minutes and that he’s not done answering lawyers’ questions. He’s expected to take the witness stand again to explain why he wrote the funding tweets and why he insisted that he had Saudi Arabia’s backing.