\n\nEquifax says a giant cybersecurity breach compromised the personal information of as many as 143 million Americans — almost half the country.\nCyber criminals have accessed sensitive information -- including names, social security numbers, birth dates, addresses, and the numbers of some driver\'s licenses.\n\nAdditionally, Equifax said that credit card numbers for about 209,000 U.S. customers were exposed, as was "personal identifying information" on roughly 182,000 U.S. customers involved in credit report disputes. Residents in the U.K. and Canada were also impacted.\n\nThe breach occurred between mid-May and July, Equifax said. The company said it discovered the hack on July 29.\n\nThe data breach is one of the worst ever, by its reach and by the kind of information exposed to the public.\n\n"This is clearly a disappointing event for our company, and one that strikes at the heart of who we are and what we do," said Equifax chairman and CEO Richard F. Smith.\n\nEquifax is one of three nationwide credit-reporting companies that track and rates the financial history of U.S. consumers. The companies are supplied with data about loans, loan payments and credit cards, as well as information on everything from child support payments, credit limits, missed rent and utilities payments, addresses and employer history, which all factor into credit scores.\n\nUnlike other data breaches, not all of the people affected by the Equifax breach may be aware that they\'re customers of the company.

Equifax has come under fire for its handling of the huge cybersecurity breach.

\n\nThe Equifax data breach that leaked information on the now-145 million people was caused by a vulnerability in Apache's Struts system. Trouble is, the software provider supplied a patch back in March that should have eliminated that vulnerability. But Equifax's former CEO (who suddenly retired last week) told the House Energy and Commerce Committee that a single IT technician was at fault for the whole thing after they failed to install the patch.\n\nWhile speaking to the committee (video below), former CEO Richard Smith outlined the company's normal procedure for new patches: Have a technician install it and then scan the system for any remaining vulnerabilities. Apparently, both the human and computer steps failed.\n\nAs Smith outlines in his written testimony (PDF), the Department of Homeland Security's Computer Emergency Readiness Team (CERT) sent Equifax (alongside many other companies) a notice on March 8th, 2017 about the vulnerability in certain versions of Apache Struts. Equifax sent out an internal mass-email, which should have required its internal IT team to fix the vulnerability within 48 hours, but that didn't happen. An automatic scan for vulnerabilities on March 15th also failed to indicate that Equifax was using a Struts version that had the vulnerability.\n\nBased on Equifax's postmortem investigations, the hacker that exploited this exact weakness likely first used it to pry into Equifax on May 13th, and then continued until July 30th, and Equifax's security tools were none the wiser.

Equifax failed to fix vulnerability within 48 hours.

\n\nHackers were able to access personal data of 143 million Equifax customers.\nHow did it happen?\n\nMuch is still unknown. But it came down to a flaw in a tool designed to build web applications, the company said in a press release this week. And Equifax admitted it was aware of the security flaw a full two months before the company says hackers first gained accessed to its data.\n\nSome of the information hackers had access to includes names, Social Security numbers, birth dates, addresses and some driver\'s license numbers.\n\nThe tool is called Apache Struts, and it\'s used by many large businesses and government organizations. Equifax used it to support its online dispute portal -- where Equifax (EFX) customers go to log issues with their credit reports. The flaw allowed hackers to take control of a website.\n\nA cybersecurity arm of the U.S. Department of Homeland Security, US-CERT, "identified and disclosed" the Apache Struts flaw in March, Equifax said in a statement.\n\nAnd the company\'s security department "was aware of this vulnerability at that time, and took efforts to identify and to patch any vulnerable systems."\n\nYet, according to the company, hackers exploited the flaw months later.\n\nEquifax has said it discovered the data breach on July 29. On Friday, it said it waited until it "observed additional suspicious activity" a day later to take the affected web application offline.\n\nAnd on August 2 Equifax contacted Mandiant, a professional cybersecurity firm, to help the company assess what data had been compromised.\n\n

Cyber criminals accessed sensitive information such as names, social security numbers, birth dates, addresses, and driver's license numbers.


\n\nThe Panama Papers are an unprecedented leak of 11.5m files from the database of the world’s fourth biggest offshore law firm, Mossack Fonseca. The records were obtained from an anonymous source by the German newspaper Süddeutsche Zeitung, which shared them with the International Consortium of Investigative Journalists (ICIJ). The ICIJ then shared them with a large network of international partners, including the Guardian and the BBC.\n\nWhat do they reveal?\nThe documents show the myriad ways in which the rich can exploit secretive offshore tax regimes. Twelve national leaders are among 143 politicians, their families and close associates from around the world known to have been using offshore tax havens.\n\nA $2bn trail leads all the way to Vladimir Putin. The Russian president’s best friend – a cellist called Sergei Roldugin – is at the centre of a scheme in which money from Russian state banks is hidden offshore. Some of it ends up in a ski resort where in 2013 Putin’s daughter Katerina got married.\n\nAmong national leaders with offshore wealth are Nawaz Sharif, Pakistan’s prime minister; Ayad Allawi, ex-interim prime minister and former vice-president of Iraq; Petro Poroshenko, president of Ukraine; Alaa Mubarak, son of Egypt’s former president; and the prime minister of Iceland, Sigmundur Davíð Gunnlaugsson.\n\nAn offshore investment fund run by the father of British prime minister David Cameron avoided ever having to pay tax in Britain by hiring a small army of Bahamas residents to sign its paperwork.

Süddeutsche Zeitung shared the records with the International Consortium of Investigative Journalists (ICIJ).

\n\nA network of secret offshore deals and vast loans worth $2bn has laid a trail to Russia’s president, Vladimir Putin.\n\nAn unprecedented leak of documents shows how this money has made members of Putin’s close circle fabulously wealthy.\n\nThough the president’s name does not appear in any of the records, the data reveals a pattern – his friends have earned millions from deals that seemingly could not have been secured without his patronage.\n\nThe documents suggest Putin’s family has benefited from this money – his friends’ fortunes appear his to spend.\n\nThe files are part of an unprecedented leak of millions of papers from the database of Mossack Fonseca, the world’s fourth biggest offshore law firm. They show how the rich and powerful are able to exploit secret offshore tax regimes in myriad ways.\n\nThe offshore trail starts in Panama, darts through Russia, Switzerland and Cyprus – and includes a private ski resort where Putin’s younger daughter, Katerina, got married in 2013.\n\nThe Panama Papers shine a particular spotlight on Sergei Roldugin, who is Putin’s best friend. Roldugin introduced Putin to the woman he subsequently married, Lyudmila, and is godfather to Putin’s older daughter, Maria.\n\nA professional musician, he has apparently accumulated a fortune – having been placed in ostensible control of a series of assets worth at least $100m, possibly more.\n\nRoldugin appears to have been picked for this role because of his lesser profile. He has denied in documents to bank officials in Switzerland and Luxembourg that he is close to any Russian public figures.

Sergei Roldugin, Putin’s best friend, has been placed in ostensible control of a series of assets worth at least $100m.

The records were obtained by the German newspaper Süddeutsche Zeitung.


\n\nHollywood mogul Harvey Weinstein has been found guilty of rape and sexual assault by courts in New York and Los Angeles.\n\nHere is a summary of the key events that led him to court:\n\n- Weinstein issues an apology acknowledging he "has caused a lot of pain" - but disputes allegations he harassed female employees over nearly three decades.\n\n- It is announced that Harvey Weinstein has been sacked by the board of his company, with immediate effect. \n\n- The organisation behind the Oscars votes to expel Weinstein. The Academy of Motion Picture Arts and Sciences says: "What\'s at issue here is a deeply troubling problem that has no place in our society."\n\n- Weinstein\'s former company files for bankruptcy, months after the Oscar-winning producer was accused of multiple sexual assaults.\n\n- Weinstein faces fresh sexual assault charges in New York from a third woman, in a case dating back to 2006.\n\n- After five days of deliberation, the jury finds Weinstein guilty of a criminal sexual act in the first degree and third-degree rape.\n\n- Weinstein goes on trial in LA, facing 11 charges involving five alleged victims.\n\n- Weinstein is found guilty by a Los Angeles jury of raping a woman.\n

Harvey Weinstein appeared in a New York court.

\n\nWhen #MeToo exploded in the fall of 2017, its most optimistic promise was that it would become more than a hashtag, more than a brief interruption in America\'s regularly scheduled sexism, more than a reckoning for famous men who had abused wealthy, white women.\n\nThere were front-page headlines, explosions of long-stifled rage and examinations of collective complicity. There was hope those two small words signaled the beginning of meaningful change and, eventually, healing –  a belief the silence was finally broken. \n\nHas #MeToo delivered? \n\n"People are paying more attention, but I\'m not convinced that we\'re able or ready to behave differently about it as a nation," said Kristen Houser, chief public affairs officer at the National Sexual Violence Resource Center.\n\nBrett Kavanaugh, who was accused of sexual assault by Christine Blasey Ford, ascended to the Supreme Court. President Donald Trump, who has been accused by 19 women of sexual misconduct, was recently accused of rape by prominent writer E. Jean Carroll, and public reaction was muted. While Congress has overhauled the process for handling sexual harassment claims on Capitol Hill, it has not passed any legislation in the past two years to address sexual harassment in America\'s workplaces. Thousands of migrant children who crossed the southern border into the U.S. have reported they were sexually assaulted while in government custody. \n\n

President Donald Trump was accused of sexual misconduct and rape by 19 women and E. Jean Carroll, respectively.

Brett Kavanaugh was accused of sexual assault and ascended to the Supreme Court.

\n\nIt has created a wave of awareness and brave confrontations over sexual harassment and assault, taking down powerful men in the process. And now the #MeToo movement has been named Time magazine\'s Person of the Year for 2017.\n\nOn its cover, Time called the people behind the movement "The Silence Breakers." Its story features women and men who have spoken out — including activist Tarana Burke, who started the hashtag 10 years ago.\n\n#MeToo rose to prominence as a social media campaign in the wake of high-profile accusations against Hollywood producer Harvey Weinstein. After actress Alyssa Milano popularized the hashtag, thousands of women began sharing their stories about the pervasive damage wrought by sexual harassment and by "open secrets" about abuse.\n\nThe movement\'s empowering reach could be seen in the platform on which Time announced its choice: the Today show. It was just one week ago that NBC fired the morning program\'s longtime and powerful co-host, Matt Lauer, over a detailed complaint of "inappropriate sexual behavior in the workplace."\n\nWhile the most high-profile #MeToo stories have come from women and men who work in the movies and media, the Time article also features women who work hourly jobs, some of whom want to remain anonymous. The magazine\'s cover portrait includes strawberry picker Isabel Pascual, lobbyist Adama Iwu and former Uber engineer Susan Fowler along with Ashley Judd and Taylor Swift.\n\n

Tarana Burke started the #MeToo hashtag 10 years ago


\nThe devastating fire that ravaged the famed Notre Dame Cathedral in Paris on April 15 prompted unsubstantiated rumors online about who or what was to blame.\n\nBy Tuesday, for example, the website of former Fox News commentator Kevin Jackson had zeroed in on a whole group of people, running a headline that reads: “Muslim Ties to Notre Dame Fire.”\n\nWe could find no credible sources to support the incendiary suggestion that Muslims were responsible.\n\nThe French government said in a press release Tuesday the cause of the fire remained unknown, and Paris public prosecutor Remy Heitz told reporters that investigators were currently eyeing it as an accident.\n\nThe article on Jackson’s site, however, advances the unsupported idea of a “Muslim attack” through paragraphs of innuendo, not fact.\n\n“Was this a true accident? Or is someone trying to send Christians a message?” the article on theblacksphere.net reads. “Many people speculate this is a Muslim attack on Christianity. In 2016, a car parked outside Notre Dame was discovered. It contained full gas tanks and documents written in Arabic. Therefore, authorities were well-aware of the threats posed against Notre Dame.”\n\nBut there is no evidence tying that 2016 episode with this week’s fire, as some news outlets worked to make clear. The U.K.’s Telegraph, which covered the 2016 incident at the time, affixed an update to its story indicating: “This story is from 2016 and unrelated to the fire at Notre-Dame on April 15 2019.”\n\n

The cathedral is in a precarious state and needs to be stabilized.

Notre Dame Cathedral in Paris suffered a devastating fire.

Jackson's article published innuendo suggesting a "Muslim attack" was responsible.

Notre Dame Cathedral, one of the world\'s most famous churches, erupted in flames Monday in Paris, losing its spire but remaining otherwise largely intact after firefighters worked through the night to contain the fire.\n\nThe commander of the Paris firefighter brigade, Jean-Claude Gallet, said Monday night that the cathedral\'s main structure and two towers of the cathedral had been saved. Firefighters said they had contained the flames by early morning local time, and the fire was entirely out by midmorning, Gallet confirmed to NPR.\n\n\nFlames leaped through the roof and dark smoke billowed into the sky on Monday afternoon. Observers gasped as the spire fell. The roof collapsed shortly afterward.\n\n"Pray," Archbishop of Paris Michel Aupetit wrote. "If you wish, you can ring the bells of your churches to invite prayer."\n\nAs night fell on Paris and the fire continued to burn, people knelt and sang "Ave Maria" as they watched the blaze.\n\nOnly one firefighter was reported to be seriously injured.\n\nPresident Emmanuel Macron said, "Notre Dame is our history, our literature, part of our psyche" and pledged that the iconic cathedral will be rebuilt.\n\n"Let\'s be proud, because we built this cathedral more than 800 years ago, we\'ve built it and, throughout the centuries, let it grow and improved it. So I solemnly say tonight: We will rebuild it together."\nThe fire broke out during Holy Week for the world\'s Roman Catholics. At least four Masses a day take place at the cathedral.

Firefighters had contained the flames by early morning local time, and the fire was entirely out by midmorning

\nEmmanuel Macron has announced he wants to see Notre Dame cathedral rebuilt “more beautiful than before” within five years, but there are warnings that the repairs could take decades and will involve substantial challenges.\n\nThe main problems include the sourcing of materials and painstaking work to preserve elements of the church that have survived the fire but might have been badly damaged by it, experts have warned.\n\nEric Fischer, who heads a foundation restoring the 1,000-year-old Strasbourg Cathedral that recently underwent a three-year facelift, said he thought rebuilding Notre Dame would probably take several decades.\n\n“The damage will be significant,” Fischer said.\n\nAudrey Azoulay, director-general of Unesco, the UN’ cultural organisation, said restoring Notre Dame “will last a long time and cost a lot of money”.\n\nDonations have poured in from around the world for the restoration efforts, with more than €800m (£692m) pledged as French tycoons and global corporations announced they would donate.\n\n“The fire at Notre Dame reminds us that our history never stops and we will always have challenges to overcome,” Macron said on Tuesday night. “We will rebuild Notre Dame, more beautiful than before – and I want it done in the next five years. We can do it. After the time of testing comes a time of reflection and then of action.”\n\nFrench authorities revealed on Tuesday that the cathedral was within “15 to 30 minutes” of complete destruction as firefighters battled to stop flames reaching its gothic bell towers.\n\n

Emmanuel Macron announces an ambition for Notre Dame to be rebuilt within five years.


\n\nFor weeks now, forest fires have been burning across Brazil’s Amazon rainforest—generally a normal situation in the dry season, but the fires are much worse than normal this year. Brazil’s official numbers now tally more than 79,500 fires this year—more than half of those in the Amazon, making this the “most active fire year in that region since 2010.” The majority of these fires are intentional, set by farmers and ranchers to clear fields and open up land for grazing. The government of Brazilian President Jair Bolsonaro, who promised to relax environmental protections, faces growing criticism in Brazil and abroad as the Amazon burns. Gathered here, images from Brazil taken over the past few days. Editor’s note: A government handout photo of an aircraft dropping water was removed from this story, after it was discovered to have been taken years earlier.\n\n1. A laborer stares at a fire that spread to the farm he worked on next to a highway in Nova Santa Helena municipality in northern Mato Grosso state, in the Amazon basin in Brazil, on August 23, 2019.\n\n2. An aerial picture shows a fire on a piece of land in the Amazon rainforest, about 65 km from Porto Velho, in Brazil's Rondonia state, on August 23, 2019.\n\n3. A burned section of the Amazon rainforest, photographed near Abuna, Rondonia state, Brazil, on August 24, 2019.\n\n

Conservationists blame Mr Bolsonaro and his government for turning a blind eye to farmers and loggers clearing land in the Amazon, hastening deforestation.

Human-caused global warming and climate change occur worldwide.

\n\nInternational pressure may be the only way to stop the Brazilian government from taking a “suicide” path in the Amazon, one of the country’s most respected scientists has said, as the world’s biggest rainforest continues to be ravaged by thousands of deliberate fires.\n\nThe large number of conflagrations – set illegally to clear and prepare land for crops, cattle and property speculation – has prompted the state of Amazonas to declare an emergency, created giant smoke clouds that have drifted hundreds of miles, and sparked international concerns about the destruction of an essential carbon sink.\n\n“Our house is burning,” tweeted the French president, Emmanuel Macron, who called for emergency talks on the subject at this week’s G7 summit. But the response to the crisis has been mixed: while Norway and Germany have halted donations to the Brazilian government’s Amazon fund, the EU has recently signed a trade deal with South America, and the UK spent this week focusing on post-Brexit business with Brazil.\n\nOn Wednesday, the UK trade minister Conor Burns was shaking hands with his counterparts in Brasilia and declaring a desire to “deepen relations”. Asked about the fires, he declined to comment but reportedly said Bolsonaro’s government had “legitimate ambitions to bring prosperity to its people”.\n\nScientists say the ongoing destruction will have dire consequences for Brazil and the world.\n\n

The EU has recently signed a trade deal with South America.

Farmers and ranchers want to clear fields and open up land for grazing.

\n\nHollywood star Leonardo DiCaprio has announced a $5 million pledge to help reduce the number of fires in the Amazon rainforest.\n\nIt comes amid global outcry over fires in the Brazilian Amazon, with celebrities calling for action and pledging to donate to efforts in order to tackle the issue.\n\nDiCaprio announced on Sunday that Earth Alliance, an organization dedicated to environmental philanthropy that he co-chairs, was pledging $5 million in funding to protect the Amazon.\n\nIn an Instagram post, he said the fund’s purpose was “to focus critical resources for indigenous communities and other local partners working to protect the life-sustaining biodiversity of the Amazon against the surge of fires currently burning across the region.”\n\nThe post has been liked more than 1 million times in less than 24 hours. DiCaprio also asked his 34 million followers to donate to the fund, with Earth Alliance promising that 100% of the money raised will go directly to forest preservation efforts.\n\nSpeaking to Reuters on Monday, DiCaprio said the crisis in the Amazon was “incredibly tragic.”\n\n“The governments around the world, including Brazil, need to work together to make sure this doesn’t continue,” he said.\n\nAlso on Monday, French President Emmanuel Macron said G-7 nations will provide at least 20 million euros ($22 million) in emergency funding to help with efforts to prevent fires in the Amazon rainforest.\n\nSpeaking at the G-7 summit in Biarritz, France, Macron also said he had a long discussion with President Donald Trump about the issue, adding that Trump supported the G-7 initiative.\n\n

President Donald Trump supports the G-7 initiative.


\n\nIn early 2021 Bitcoin and Ether price was the center of attention as each asset seemed to hit a new all-time high every 24-hours and traders called for $100,000 BTC and $5,000 ETH. Fast forward to the present and both assets are still more than 40% down from their all-time highs and the bulls calling for unbelievable price targets are nowhere to be found.    \n\nA recent report from CoinMetrics reviewed the performance of Bitcoin and altcoins during Q2 2021 and the analysts found that even with the sharp May 19 market correction many assets finished the quarter in the green with Dogecoin coming out on top with a  392% gain.\n\nEthereum Classic and Polygon (MATIC) were the other two breakaway stars of Q2, with each gaining 297% and 227% respectively despite a nearly 39% decline in the price of Bitcoin.\n\nOne of the biggest developments during Q2 was the Ether price breakout from $1,971 on April 1 to a new record high of $4,362 on May 11 before the market-wide sell-off resulted in a quarterly close at $2,240, which represents a 13.2% gain.\n\nCoinMetrics highlighted that Ether price “benefited from a renewed surge of retail interest which was partially driven by the rapid rise of NFTs.\n\nAs a result of the retail surge, the number of addresses holding at least 0.1 Ether increased from 4.58 million to more than 5.20 million.\n\n

\n\nIn this article, BeInCrypto takes a look at previous bitcoin (BTC) and Ethereum (ETH) price movement cycles. The purpose is to try and determine if there is a significant difference in volatility between the two.\n\n While the 2017-2020 movements have been relatively similar, ETH has increased at a much faster rate in 2021.\n\nBetween 2017 and 2020, the movement has been relatively similar for both assets.\n\nMeasuring from the all-time high of early 2018, BTC corrected for a 363 day period, losing 84% of its value in the process. On the other hand, ETH corrected for 336 days, losing 94% of its value. Therefore, while the ETH correction was sharper and lasted for a shorter period of time, there was not a pronounced difference between the two.\n\nFollowing this, BTC increased by 330% in 191 days, while ETH moved upwards by 290% in 197 days. This somewhat made up for the difference from the sharper ETH fall preceding this upward movement.\n\nFinally, BTC decreased by 71.50% in 261 days leading up to the March 2020 bottom, while ETH decreased by 66.50% in 259 days, with very similar rates of decrease.\n\nUnlike the 2017-2020 period, there is a significant difference in the movement of both assets in 2021.\n\nMeasuring from the March 2020 bottom, BTC increased by 1,520% in 398 days. While this is a formidable rate of increase, ETH more than doubled it by increasing 3,620% in 430 days.\n\n

In 2021, ETH has increased at a much faster rate in 2021 than bitcoin.

\n\nEthereum’s much-hyped and somewhat controversial “London” hard fork has just activated.\n\nSo far, news of the successful upgrade has coincided with a runup in the price of ether, the native token of ethereum’s blockchain. The cryptocurrency is at $2,620, up 3.9% in the last 24 hours.\n\nA big part of the enthusiasm has to do with the fact that the software upgrade means a few big — and necessary — changes are coming to the code underpinning the world’s second-biggest cryptocurrency. \n\nIt has always been a tough go for ethereum users. The blockchain has a long-standing problem with scaling, and its highly unpredictable and sometimes exorbitant transaction fees can annoy even its biggest fans.\n\nThe problem has become worse in recent months thanks to a surge in interest in nonfungible tokens, which are mostly built on ethereum’s blockchain, as well as an explosive growth in the world of decentralized finance, or DeFi, which also largely uses the ethereum blockchain.\n\nThursday’s changes to the code, which has little to do with the city of London, are designed to fix many of these issues by destroying or “burning” ether coins and changing the way transaction fees work so that they are more predictable. \n\n

Ethereum has a long-standing problem with scaling and unpredictable transaction fees.

\n\nA recent run-up in Ether prices against its top rival, Bitcoin, appears to be at the risk of exhaustion, even as analysts see the second-largest cryptocurrency as the stronger of the two.\n\nThe ETH/BTC exchange rate has risen by up to 40.19% after bottoming out at 0.0553 BTC on May 23. The powerful rebound move reflected a spike in the capital flow from the spot ETH to spot BTC market. That also led analysts at Delphi Digital, an independent market research firm, to highlight Ether\'s "formidable strength" in the Bitcoin-quoted markets. They wrote:\n\n"If you look at the YTD ETH/BTC chart in isolation, you probably wouldn’t guess fear in the crypto market is the highest it’s been in a year."\nBut a closer look into the ETH/BTC chart returns evidence that bullish traders might be heading into a bull trap.\n\nETH/BTC formed a pattern that began wide at the bottom and contracted as the price moved higher. As a result, the trading range narrowed. Meanwhile, the volumes declined as the prices rose and the contracting pattern evolved.\n\nClassic chartists refer to the structure as a rising wedge. They interpret it as a traditional bearish reversal pattern, primarily because of the loss of the upside momentum on each successive high formation.\n\nRising wedges mature as the asset reaches the level where its two trendlines converge. Nevertheless, bearish confirmations do not come until the price breaks below the wedge support in a convincing fashion.

The volumes declined as the prices rose.


Microsoft has finally commented on the rumblings about the $10 billion investment into the OpenAI, maker of ChatGPT, after rumors have been swirling for weeks about this colossal financial deal. While Microsoft didn’t confirm the actual financial figure in the press release on Monday, they did announce the partnership between the two companies would be extended.\n\nThis recent investment is the third phase of the financial commitment from Microsoft. Previous investments were made in 2019 and 2021 into the AI startup.\n\nWe’re going to look at how artificial intelligence will change how Microsoft competes with Google, Apple and other tech giants—and how Q.ai can help you keep abreast of the changes.\n\nMicrosoft finally confirmed a new multi-year investment in OpenAI, the company behind ChatGPT, in a press release on January 23. When we last wrote about Microsoft’s investment in ChatGPT, it was reported by Semafor that the tech giant was looking to invest an additional $10 billion into the startup. The official release doesn’t confirm or deny the rumored dollar figure, as they only commented on continuing the partnership.\n\nMicrosoft noted how they were committed to turning Azure into an AI supercomputer for the entire world. Microsoft Azure is the exclusive cloud provider for every tool under the OpenAI banner.\n\nJust as a quick reminder, ChatGPT is the chatbot released late last year by OpenAI, a company that Elon Musk and Sam Altman originally founded. This revolutionary tool reported one million users at the beginning of December after being out for about a week.

Google releases its own “experimental conversational AI” tool, called “Bard".

Billionaire Twitter owner Elon Musk is again sounding warning bells on the dangers of artificial intelligence to humanity — and claiming that a popular chatbot has a liberal bias that he plans to counter with his own AI creation.\n\nMusk told Fox News host Tucker Carlson in a segment aired Monday night that he plans to create an alternative to the popular AI chatbot ChatGPT that he is calling “TruthGPT,” which will be a “maximum truth-seeking AI that tries to understand the nature of the universe.”\n\nThe idea, Musk said, is that an AI that wants to understand humanity is less likely to destroy it.\n\nMusk also said he’s worried that ChatGPT “is being trained to be politically correct.”\n\nIn the first of a two-part interview with Carlson, Musk also advocated for the regulation of artificial intelligence, saying he’s a “big fan.” He called AI “more dangerous” than cars or rockets and said it has the potential to destroy humanity.\n\neparately, Musk has incorporated a new business called X.AI Corp,, according to a Nevada business filing. The website of the Nevada secretary of state’s office says the business was formed on March 9 and lists Musk as its director and his longtime adviser, Jared Birchall, as secretary.\n\nMusk has for many years expressed strong opinions about artificial intelligence and has dismissed other tech leaders, including Mark Zuckerberg and Bill Gates, for having what he has described as a “limited” understanding of the field.

Musk has incorporated a new business called X.AI Corp.

OpenAI has launched its first subscription plan for ChatGPT, opening up the popular AI model for premium use just two months after its public launch.\n\nThe new plan, called ChatGPT Plus and announced in a company blog post on Wednesday, will charge subscribers $20 for monthly use of ChatGPT’s tools. Users will get priority access to ChatGPT “during peak times,” faster responses and “priority access to new features and improvements,” the company wrote. The subscription is only available initially in the United States and will roll out to a waitlist first.\n\nOpenAI did not immediately respond to a request for comment on the announcement. The company also noted in its post that a waitlist is now available for an upcoming ChatGPT API.\n\nThe move comes just weeks after OpenAI president and chairman Greg Brockman posted to the company’s official Discord server asking users for input on ways to “monetize ChatGPT.” Some users (including this author) reported seeing an offer for a $42 per month pro tier in January, which promised early and priority access to new features and better reliability should the service, which has suffered repeated outages due to high demand in past weeks, again hit capacity.\n\nAfter OpenAI launched ChatGPT in late November, more than one million users overwhelmed the tool’s site within five days, OpenAI has said. Since then, product releases and other announcements have flowed fast out of the San Francisco-based company led by CEO Sam Altman.

OpenAI launches subscription plan for ChatGPT

What is ChatGPT? I asked the buzzy artificial intelligence chatbot, which has ignited conversation in schools, corporate boardrooms and social media, to explain itself.\n\nIn its own description, ChatGPT is “an AI-powered chatbot developed by OpenAI, based on the GPT (Generative Pretrained Transformer) language model. It uses deep learning techniques to generate human-like responses to text inputs in a conversational manner.”\n\nThe tool is the talk of the business world. It has been mentioned on earnings calls by management from a range of companies including oil giants, banks — and even the industrial behemoth Caterpillar.\n\nIt has also sparked concerns over potential abuses. In classrooms, students have used ChatGPT to generate entire essays, while hackers have begun testing it to write malicious code.\n\nSo what is ChatGPT, exactly? Here’s a simple guide on all you need to know about the popular AI chatbot.\n\nChatGPT is an AI chatbot developed by San Francisco-based startup OpenAI. OpenAI was co-founded in 2015 by Elon Musk and Sam Altman and is backed by well-known investors — most notably Microsoft. \n\nIt is one of several examples of generative AI. These are tools that allow users to enter written prompts and receive new human-like text or images and videos generated by the AI.\n\nPrior examples include Dall-E, a text-to-image program from OpenAI that garnered attention from people captivated by its ability to come up with realistic, often absurd, pictures that match people’s text descriptions.

It has sparked concerns over potential abuses, such as students using it to generate entire essays and hackers testing it to write malicious code.

Alibaba says it will launch its own ChatGPT-style tool, becoming the latest tech giant to jump on the chatbot bandwagon.\n\nThe Chinese behemoth said it was testing an artificial intelligence-powered chatbot internally. It did not share details of when it would launch or what the application would be called.\n\n“Frontier innovations such as large language models and generative AI have been our [focus] areas since the formation of DAMO in 2017,” an Alibaba (BABA) spokesperson told CNN in a Thursday statement, referring to an acronym for the company’s research arm that focuses on machine intelligence, data computing and robotics.\n\n“As a technology leader, we will continue to invest in turning cutting-edge innovations into value-added applications for our customers as well as their end-users.”\n\nAlibaba’s Hong Kong-listed shares ticked up 1.4% on Thursday morning.\n\nCompanies around the world are racing to develop and release their own versions of ChatGPT, the application that allows users to automatically write essays or pass tests.\n\nThe tool is built on a large language model, which is trained on vast troves of data online in order to generate compelling responses to user prompts. Experts have long warned that these tools have the potential to spread inaccurate information.\n\nThis week, Google (GOOGL) and Chinese search engine giant Baidu (BIDU) both unveiled plans to launch similar services of their own.\n\nGoogle’s tool, named “Bard,” will roll out to the public in the coming weeks, while Baidu’s bot, called “Wenxin Yiyan” in Chinese or “ERNIE Bot” in English, will launch in March.

Alibaba announces plans to launch its own ChatGPT-style tool.


Shares in banks all over the world have plummeted in recent days as fears that the collapse of Silicon Valley Bank (SVB) could precipitate a wider crisis in the sector.\n\nThe speed at which market jitters have spread across the world have forced bank executives and regulators to move with unprecedented swiftness: US authorities guaranteed all deposits in SVB – and smaller bank Signature – 48 hours after it collapsed. Just hours after Credit Suisse’s share price plunged on Wednesday, the Swiss central bank stepped in with a $54bn loan.\n\nWhile there’s nothing new about a financial emergency, these crises – and their resulting responses – are unique in having been accelerated by a frenzy of social media chatter that has fuelled the panic.\n\n‘It was a bank sprint, not a bank run’\nA bank run occurs when customers lose faith in an institution’s ability to look after their money, and large numbers withdraw their deposits all at once. As more people withdraw their funds, the likelihood of the bank being able to cover the withdrawals falls, leading more customers to pile in and demand the return of their money.\n\n“If you see a bomb disposal expert running down the street, don’t ask them what’s happened, just try to keep up,” writes Daniel Davies, the managing director of Frontline Analysts, in the Financial Times.\n\nRumours around a bank’s solvency can build up for months or years before it leads to a run. Or it can happen in a matter of hours.

UBS took over Swiss banking giant Credit Suisse in a rushed takeover.

The collapse of Silicon Valley Bank continues to reverberate, hitting bank stocks, revealing hidden stresses, knocking on to Credit Suisse, and setting off a political blame-game.\n\n\nWhy the $212bn tech-lender abruptly collapsed, triggering the most significant financial crisis since 2008, has no single answer. Was it, as some argue, the result of Trump-era regulation rollbacks, risk mismanagement at the bank, sharp interest rate rises after a decade of ultra-low borrowing costs, or perhaps a combination of all three?\n\nFederal investigations have begun and lawsuits have been filed and no doubt new issues at the bank will emerge. But for now, here are the main reasons experts believed SVB failed.\n\nThe Vermont senator Bernie Sanders argues that the culprit was an “absurd” 2018 law, supported by Congress and signed by Donald Trump, that undid some of the credit requirements imposed under the Dodd-Frank banking legislation brought in after the 2008 banking crisis.\n\nDodd-Frank required that banks with at least $50bn in assets – banks considered “systemically important” – undergo an annual Federal Reserve “stress test” and maintain certain levels of capital as well as plans for a living will if they failed.\n\nSVB’s chief executive, Greg Becker, argued before Congress in 2015 that the $50bn threshold (SVB held $40bn at the time) was unnecessary and his bank, like other “mid-sized” or regional banks, “does not present systemic risks”.\n\nTrump said the new bill went a “long way toward fixing” Dodd-Frank, which he called a “job-killer”.

In 2018 a law was passed for banks to not be required to have a $50bn safety capital.

President Biden says customers of U.S. banks should have confidence that their money will be there when they need it, as he seeks to limit the damage done by the collapse of Silicon Valley Bank and other problems. He also promised accountability for leaders and investors of banks that fail.\n\nBiden\'s words didn\'t prevent anxiety over the banking emergency from hammering stock prices of financial institutions on Monday morning. The pain was particularly acute for regional and middle-sized banks.\n\nThe banking emergency has prompted federal regulators to take extraordinary actions to close two banks and guarantee all their deposits.\n\nBecause of those actions, Biden said, "every American should feel confident that their deposits will be there if and when they need them."\n\nCompanies with accounts at the collapsed banks "can breathe easier, knowing they\'ll be able to pay their workers and pay their bills," Biden said. "Their hardworking employees can breathe easier as well."\n\nBiden spoke from the White House at 9 a.m. ET Monday, just 30 minutes before the New York stock market opened. But one hour into trading, a number of banking stocks were down.\n\nMany eyes are on First Republic Bank, the San Francisco institution whose clients include tech companies and wealthy investors. The bank\'s stock plummeted below the $20 mark early Monday — one week after it closed at $122.\n\nBank of America and Wells Fargo also saw their stock prices slip, both of them falling by 4% or more in the first hour of trading.

President Biden speaks on the banking emergency and assures customers of U.S. banks that their money will be there when they need it

Shares in banks all over the world have plummeted.


\n\nEthereum’s much-hyped and somewhat controversial “London” hard fork has just activated.\n\nSo far, news of the successful upgrade has coincided with a runup in the price of ether, the native token of ethereum’s blockchain. The cryptocurrency is at $2,620, up 3.9% in the last 24 hours.\n\nA big part of the enthusiasm has to do with the fact that the software upgrade means a few big — and necessary — changes are coming to the code underpinning the world’s second-biggest cryptocurrency. \n\nIt has always been a tough go for ethereum users. The blockchain has a long-standing problem with scaling, and its highly unpredictable and sometimes exorbitant transaction fees can annoy even its biggest fans.\n\nThe problem has become worse in recent months thanks to a surge in interest in nonfungible tokens, which are mostly built on ethereum’s blockchain, as well as an explosive growth in the world of decentralized finance, or DeFi, which also largely uses the ethereum blockchain.\n\nThursday’s changes to the code, which has little to do with the city of London, are designed to fix many of these issues by destroying or “burning” ether coins and changing the way transaction fees work so that they are more predictable. \n\n

Ether price broke out from $1,971 to a new record high of $4,362 on May 11.

\n\nIn this article, BeInCrypto takes a look at previous bitcoin (BTC) and Ethereum (ETH) price movement cycles. The purpose is to try and determine if there is a significant difference in volatility between the two.\n\n While the 2017-2020 movements have been relatively similar, ETH has increased at a much faster rate in 2021.\n\nBetween 2017 and 2020, the movement has been relatively similar for both assets.\n\nMeasuring from the all-time high of early 2018, BTC corrected for a 363 day period, losing 84% of its value in the process. On the other hand, ETH corrected for 336 days, losing 94% of its value. Therefore, while the ETH correction was sharper and lasted for a shorter period of time, there was not a pronounced difference between the two.\n\nFollowing this, BTC increased by 330% in 191 days, while ETH moved upwards by 290% in 197 days. This somewhat made up for the difference from the sharper ETH fall preceding this upward movement.\n\nFinally, BTC decreased by 71.50% in 261 days leading up to the March 2020 bottom, while ETH decreased by 66.50% in 259 days, with very similar rates of decrease.\n\nUnlike the 2017-2020 period, there is a significant difference in the movement of both assets in 2021.\n\nMeasuring from the March 2020 bottom, BTC increased by 1,520% in 398 days. While this is a formidable rate of increase, ETH more than doubled it by increasing 3,620% in 430 days.\n\n

The 2017-2020 movements have been relatively similar between Ethereum and bitcoin prices.

\n\nIn early 2021 Bitcoin and Ether price was the center of attention as each asset seemed to hit a new all-time high every 24-hours and traders called for $100,000 BTC and $5,000 ETH. Fast forward to the present and both assets are still more than 40% down from their all-time highs and the bulls calling for unbelievable price targets are nowhere to be found.    \n\nA recent report from CoinMetrics reviewed the performance of Bitcoin and altcoins during Q2 2021 and the analysts found that even with the sharp May 19 market correction many assets finished the quarter in the green with Dogecoin coming out on top with a  392% gain.\n\nEthereum Classic and Polygon (MATIC) were the other two breakaway stars of Q2, with each gaining 297% and 227% respectively despite a nearly 39% decline in the price of Bitcoin.\n\nOne of the biggest developments during Q2 was the Ether price breakout from $1,971 on April 1 to a new record high of $4,362 on May 11 before the market-wide sell-off resulted in a quarterly close at $2,240, which represents a 13.2% gain.\n\nCoinMetrics highlighted that Ether price “benefited from a renewed surge of retail interest which was partially driven by the rapid rise of NFTs.\n\nAs a result of the retail surge, the number of addresses holding at least 0.1 Ether increased from 4.58 million to more than 5.20 million.\n\n

Bitcoin and Ether prices hit all-time highs in early 2021.

NFTs are mostly built on Ethereum's blockchain.


Shares in banks all over the world have plummeted in recent days as fears that the collapse of Silicon Valley Bank (SVB) could precipitate a wider crisis in the sector.\n\nThe speed at which market jitters have spread across the world have forced bank executives and regulators to move with unprecedented swiftness: US authorities guaranteed all deposits in SVB – and smaller bank Signature – 48 hours after it collapsed. Just hours after Credit Suisse’s share price plunged on Wednesday, the Swiss central bank stepped in with a $54bn loan.\n\nWhile there’s nothing new about a financial emergency, these crises – and their resulting responses – are unique in having been accelerated by a frenzy of social media chatter that has fuelled the panic.\n\n‘It was a bank sprint, not a bank run’\nA bank run occurs when customers lose faith in an institution’s ability to look after their money, and large numbers withdraw their deposits all at once. As more people withdraw their funds, the likelihood of the bank being able to cover the withdrawals falls, leading more customers to pile in and demand the return of their money.\n\n“If you see a bomb disposal expert running down the street, don’t ask them what’s happened, just try to keep up,” writes Daniel Davies, the managing director of Frontline Analysts, in the Financial Times.\n\nRumours around a bank’s solvency can build up for months or years before it leads to a run. Or it can happen in a matter of hours.

The collapse of Silicon Valley Bank continues to reverberate, hitting bank stocks, revealing hidden stresses, knocking on to Credit Suisse, and setting off a political blame-game.\n\n\nWhy the $212bn tech-lender abruptly collapsed, triggering the most significant financial crisis since 2008, has no single answer. Was it, as some argue, the result of Trump-era regulation rollbacks, risk mismanagement at the bank, sharp interest rate rises after a decade of ultra-low borrowing costs, or perhaps a combination of all three?\n\nFederal investigations have begun and lawsuits have been filed and no doubt new issues at the bank will emerge. But for now, here are the main reasons experts believed SVB failed.\n\nThe Vermont senator Bernie Sanders argues that the culprit was an “absurd” 2018 law, supported by Congress and signed by Donald Trump, that undid some of the credit requirements imposed under the Dodd-Frank banking legislation brought in after the 2008 banking crisis.\n\nDodd-Frank required that banks with at least $50bn in assets – banks considered “systemically important” – undergo an annual Federal Reserve “stress test” and maintain certain levels of capital as well as plans for a living will if they failed.\n\nSVB’s chief executive, Greg Becker, argued before Congress in 2015 that the $50bn threshold (SVB held $40bn at the time) was unnecessary and his bank, like other “mid-sized” or regional banks, “does not present systemic risks”.\n\nTrump said the new bill went a “long way toward fixing” Dodd-Frank, which he called a “job-killer”.

Interest rates rise after a decade of ultra-low borrowing costs.

Stefan Kalb was in the middle of a meeting around 1 p.m. on Thursday when a fellow company executive sent him a panicked Slack message: "Do you know what\'s happening at SVB?"\n\nKalb, the CEO and co-founder of Seattle-based food management startup Shelf Engine, had been following news of a bank run at Silicon Valley Bank. Droves of depositors were attempting to pull out as much as $42 billion from the bank on Thursday alone, as fear spread that the bank was teetering on the brink of collapse.\n\nThe bank seemed to be on firm financial footing on Wednesday. The following day, it appeared to be under water.\n\nFor Shelf Engine, a 40-person startup founded in 2015 that uses artificial intelligence to help grocery stores reduce food waste, this was a big problem.\n\nNot only did Silicon Valley Bank help the company process checks and payments, but millions of dollars of the startup\'s cash was locked up in the bank.\n\nKalb sprung into action. He and his team quickly opened an account at JPMorgan Chase and attempted to wire transfer every last penny out of Silicon Valley Bank.\n\n"Unfortunately, our wire was not honored and our money is still at Silicon Valley Bank," Kalb, 37, said in an interview on Friday. "We woke up this morning hoping the money would be in that JPMorgan bank account, and it was not."

Hysteria and fear spread that the SVB was collapsing.

President Biden says customers of U.S. banks should have confidence that their money will be there when they need it, as he seeks to limit the damage done by the collapse of Silicon Valley Bank and other problems. He also promised accountability for leaders and investors of banks that fail.\n\nBiden\'s words didn\'t prevent anxiety over the banking emergency from hammering stock prices of financial institutions on Monday morning. The pain was particularly acute for regional and middle-sized banks.\n\nThe banking emergency has prompted federal regulators to take extraordinary actions to close two banks and guarantee all their deposits.\n\nBecause of those actions, Biden said, "every American should feel confident that their deposits will be there if and when they need them."\n\nCompanies with accounts at the collapsed banks "can breathe easier, knowing they\'ll be able to pay their workers and pay their bills," Biden said. "Their hardworking employees can breathe easier as well."\n\nBiden spoke from the White House at 9 a.m. ET Monday, just 30 minutes before the New York stock market opened. But one hour into trading, a number of banking stocks were down.\n\nMany eyes are on First Republic Bank, the San Francisco institution whose clients include tech companies and wealthy investors. The bank\'s stock plummeted below the $20 mark early Monday — one week after it closed at $122.\n\nBank of America and Wells Fargo also saw their stock prices slip, both of them falling by 4% or more in the first hour of trading.

President Biden speaks on the banking emergency and assures customers of U.S. banks that their money will be there when they need it


On Wednesday, Silicon Valley Bank was a well-capitalized institution seeking to raise some funds.\n\nWithin 48 hours, a panic induced by the very venture capital community that SVB had served and nurtured ended the bank’s 40-year-run.\n\nRegulators shuttered SVB Friday and seized its deposits in the largest U.S. banking failure since the 2008 financial crisis and the second-largest ever. The company’s downward spiral began late Wednesday, when it surprised investors with news that it needed to raise $2.25 billion to shore up its balance sheet. What followed was the rapid collapse of a highly-respected bank that had grown alongside its technology clients.\n\nEven now, as the dust begins to settle on the second bank wind-down announced this week, members of the VC community are lamenting the role that other investors played in SVB’s demise.\n\n“This was a hysteria-induced bank run caused by VCs,” Ryan Falvey, a fintech investor at Restive Ventures, told CNBC. “This is going to go down as one of the ultimate cases of an industry cutting its nose off to spite its face.”\n\nThe episode is the latest fallout from the Federal Reserve’s actions to stem inflation with its most aggressive rate hiking campaign in four decades. The ramifications could be far-reaching, with concerns that startups may be unable to pay employees in coming days, venture investors may struggle to raise funds, and an already-battered sector could face a deeper malaise.

Silicon Valley Bank attempted to raise $2.25 billion from investors.

Interest rates rise after a decade of ultra-low borrowing costs.


Emmanuel Macron announces an ambition for Notre Dame to be rebuilt within five years.

A fire that devastated Notre Dame Cathedral in the heart of Paris was brought under control by firefighters in the early hours of Tuesday morning, though officials warned there were still residual fires to put out.\n\nThousands of Parisians watched in horror from behind police cordons as a ferocious blaze devastated Notre Dame Cathedral on Monday night, destroying its spire and a large part of the roof.\n\nAn investigation has been opened by the prosecutor’s office, but police said it began accidentally and may be linked to building work at the cathedral. The 850-year-old gothic masterpiece had been undergoing restoration work.\n\nThe French president, Emmanuel Macron, attended the scene and later gave a speech in which he vowed that the cathedral would be rebuilt, as fire crews said the landmark’s rectangular bell towers and structure of the building had been saved.\nMacron said “the worst had been avoided” thanks to hundreds of brave firefighters who battled for hours and who would continue working through the night. One firefighter was severely injured but no other casualties were reported.\n\n“What happened tonight in Paris, in this cathedral, is a terrible event,” the president said, vowing to raise funds worldwide and bring the best talents from around the world to reconstruct the building in its entirety.\n\n“Notre Dame is our history, our literature, part of our psyche, the place of all our great events, our epidemics, our wars, our liberations, the epicentre of our lives ... So I solemnly say tonight: we will rebuild it together.”

Firefighters battle for hours, one severely injured, no other casualties

Notre Dame Cathedral, one of the world\'s most famous churches, erupted in flames Monday in Paris, losing its spire but remaining otherwise largely intact after firefighters worked through the night to contain the fire.\n\nThe commander of the Paris firefighter brigade, Jean-Claude Gallet, said Monday night that the cathedral\'s main structure and two towers of the cathedral had been saved. Firefighters said they had contained the flames by early morning local time, and the fire was entirely out by midmorning, Gallet confirmed to NPR.\n\n\nFlames leaped through the roof and dark smoke billowed into the sky on Monday afternoon. Observers gasped as the spire fell. The roof collapsed shortly afterward.\n\n"Pray," Archbishop of Paris Michel Aupetit wrote. "If you wish, you can ring the bells of your churches to invite prayer."\n\nAs night fell on Paris and the fire continued to burn, people knelt and sang "Ave Maria" as they watched the blaze.\n\nOnly one firefighter was reported to be seriously injured.\n\nPresident Emmanuel Macron said, "Notre Dame is our history, our literature, part of our psyche" and pledged that the iconic cathedral will be rebuilt.\n\n"Let\'s be proud, because we built this cathedral more than 800 years ago, we\'ve built it and, throughout the centuries, let it grow and improved it. So I solemnly say tonight: We will rebuild it together."\nThe fire broke out during Holy Week for the world\'s Roman Catholics. At least four Masses a day take place at the cathedral.

Firefighters had contained the flames by early morning local time, and the fire was entirely out by midmorning

At 6:20 p.m. local time (12 p.m. ET) on Monday, a fire alarm rang out, interrupting mass. Security guards started to evacuate the cathedral even though they did not see any sign of a fire, a spokesman for the Paris fire brigade told CNN.\nFrançois-Xavier Lochet, a 70-year-old worshiper, said the congregation had just begun the Universal Prayer when the siren sounded. He said visitors were ushered out but those gathered for mass remained in place. Lochet said mass continued until a police officer went up and told the priest: “This is no joke. You’ve got to get out.”\nTwenty-three minutes later, at 6:43 p.m. (12:43 p.m. ET), a second alarm blared and the fire was visible at that point, the fire department said.\nAround 400 firefighters were deployed to the scene but were delayed slightly by rush hour traffic.\nPolice in Paris confirmed a fire had taken hold at Notre Dame and asked the public to avoid the area in a tweet sent at 7:20 p.m. (1:20 p.m. ET). A minute later, Paris Mayor Anne Hidalgo posted a tweet saying “a terrible fire is underway” with photographs taken outside the church: one of smoke billowing from near the spire and over the towers, and a second showing the fire department responders working at the scene.\n\nShortly before 8 p.m. (2 p.m. ET), the cathedral’s famed spire burned to a blackened shell before finally toppling, as thousands of Parisians who had gathered in the streets watched in horror.

Fire visible at 6:43 p.m. and 400 firefighters deployed to the scene.

\nThe devastating fire that ravaged the famed Notre Dame Cathedral in Paris on April 15 prompted unsubstantiated rumors online about who or what was to blame.\n\nBy Tuesday, for example, the website of former Fox News commentator Kevin Jackson had zeroed in on a whole group of people, running a headline that reads: “Muslim Ties to Notre Dame Fire.”\n\nWe could find no credible sources to support the incendiary suggestion that Muslims were responsible.\n\nThe French government said in a press release Tuesday the cause of the fire remained unknown, and Paris public prosecutor Remy Heitz told reporters that investigators were currently eyeing it as an accident.\n\nThe article on Jackson’s site, however, advances the unsupported idea of a “Muslim attack” through paragraphs of innuendo, not fact.\n\n“Was this a true accident? Or is someone trying to send Christians a message?” the article on theblacksphere.net reads. “Many people speculate this is a Muslim attack on Christianity. In 2016, a car parked outside Notre Dame was discovered. It contained full gas tanks and documents written in Arabic. Therefore, authorities were well-aware of the threats posed against Notre Dame.”\n\nBut there is no evidence tying that 2016 episode with this week’s fire, as some news outlets worked to make clear. The U.K.’s Telegraph, which covered the 2016 incident at the time, affixed an update to its story indicating: “This story is from 2016 and unrelated to the fire at Notre-Dame on April 15 2019.”\n\n

Notre Dame Cathedral in Paris suffered a devastating fire.


\n\nThe wooden structure supporting the roof of Notre Dame Cathedral was so vast, it was known as "the forest." It burned like a forest too. After the April 2019 fire that badly damaged the Paris landmark, nothing was left of the intricate maze of medieval beams but charred black timbers that pierced the nave and transept as they fell to the cathedral floor, leaving a gaping, smoking hole.\n\nNow that charpente, as the framework supporting the roof is called, is being rebuilt as part of the effort to restore and reopen one of the world\'s most famous churches by the end of 2024.\n\nAt Ateliers Perrault, a 250-year-old carpentry company in France\'s Loire Valley — one of the two chosen to restore the roof — you don\'t hear the whirring of electric saws. It\'s the chopping of axes that resounds as craftsmen transform oak trees into long, rectangular beams by hand.\n\nThis company devotes itself to France\'s historical buildings — some 48,000 of them — so its carpenters are used to working with traditional methods.\n\n

The framework supporting the roof of Notre Dame is being rebuilt.

\nEmmanuel Macron has announced he wants to see Notre Dame cathedral rebuilt “more beautiful than before” within five years, but there are warnings that the repairs could take decades and will involve substantial challenges.\n\nThe main problems include the sourcing of materials and painstaking work to preserve elements of the church that have survived the fire but might have been badly damaged by it, experts have warned.\n\nEric Fischer, who heads a foundation restoring the 1,000-year-old Strasbourg Cathedral that recently underwent a three-year facelift, said he thought rebuilding Notre Dame would probably take several decades.\n\n“The damage will be significant,” Fischer said.\n\nAudrey Azoulay, director-general of Unesco, the UN’ cultural organisation, said restoring Notre Dame “will last a long time and cost a lot of money”.\n\nDonations have poured in from around the world for the restoration efforts, with more than €800m (£692m) pledged as French tycoons and global corporations announced they would donate.\n\n“The fire at Notre Dame reminds us that our history never stops and we will always have challenges to overcome,” Macron said on Tuesday night. “We will rebuild Notre Dame, more beautiful than before – and I want it done in the next five years. We can do it. After the time of testing comes a time of reflection and then of action.”\n\nFrench authorities revealed on Tuesday that the cathedral was within “15 to 30 minutes” of complete destruction as firefighters battled to stop flames reaching its gothic bell towers.\n\n

Emmanuel Macron announces an ambition for Notre Dame to be rebuilt within five years.

The catastrophic fire at the Notre Dame Cathedral could have been caused by a burning cigarette or an electrical malfunction, French prosecutors said Wednesday.\n\nA preliminary investigation into the April fire, which devastated large parts of the 850-year-old church, found no signs that the blaze was started deliberately, Paris prosecutor Remy Heitz said in a statement.\n\nInvestigators carried out a hundred witness hearings during the preliminary investigation, which concluded on Wednesday, Heitz said.\n\nProsecutors are now looking into the possibility of negligence and said they were opening a judicial investigation.\n\n“If certain failings – which may explain the scale of the fire – have been brought to light, the investigations carried out to this date have not been able to determine the causes of the fire,” Heitz said.\n\nHeitz said the judicial investigation would be carried out “on the grounds of involuntary damage by fire due to a manifestly deliberate breach of a duty of care or safety imposed by law or regulation, which occurred under conditions likely to expose persons to bodily harm.”

Investigators carried out a hundred witness hearings during the preliminary investigation.

When you combine an international event with the rapid dissemination of news on social media, too often you get loads of misinformation and, sometimes, completely fabricated conspiracy theories.\n\nUnfortunately, such is the case with the massive fire that nearly destroyed the historic Notre Dame cathedral in Paris on April 15.\n\nFrench authorities said they have not found evidence of arson and terrorism, and they are treating the fire as an accident that may be linked to an ongoing 6 million-euro renovation project on the church.\n\nThat still didn’t stop some internet users from suggesting it was some kind of terrorist act – as did one low-quality video clip posted to Facebook by the page "Equinox News Network."\n\nThe 18-second clip shows a man walking in one of the cathedral’s towers not long after the fire started. The video’s caption says: "No workers present at the time that the Notre Dame Cathedral fire started......So who is this guy dressed in Muslim garb??"\n\nThe video post was flagged as part of Facebook’s efforts to combat false news and misinformation on its News Feed. (Read more about our partnership with Facebook.)\n\nThe person in the picture isn’t dressed in "Muslim garb" — the person is a firefighter.\n\nThe clip was plucked from CNBC’s three-hour livestream of the fire and can be seen around the 42-minute mark.

Several false claims spread about the fire, including that it was intentional or terrorism-related.

The rector of Notre Dame Cathedral says the Paris landmark is still so fragile that there\'s a “50 percent chance” the structure might not be saved, because scaffolding installed before this year\'s fire is threatening the vaults of the Gothic monument.\n\nMonsignor Patrick Chauvet said restoration work isn\'t likely to begin until 2021 — and described his “heartache” that Notre Dame couldn\'t hold Christmas services this year, for the first time since the French Revolution.\n\n“Today it is not out of danger," he told The Associated Press on the sidelines of Christmas Eve midnight Mass in a nearby church. “It will be out of danger when we take out the remaining scaffolding.”\n\n“Today we can say that there is maybe a 50% chance that it will be saved. There is also 50% chance of scaffolding falling onto the three vaults, so as you can see the building is still very fragile,” he said.\n\n\n\nThe 12th-century cathedral was under renovation at the time of the accidental April fire, which destroyed its roof and collapsed its spire. With no more roof to keep the massive stone structure stable, the cathedral\'s surviving vaults are crucial to keeping it standing, but they are vulnerable.\n\nSome 50,000 tubes of scaffolding crisscrossed the back of the edifice at the time of the fire, and some were damaged. Removing them without causing further problems is one of the toughest parts of the cleanup effort.

Cathedral won't hold Christmas services.


Security guards started to evacuate the Notre Dame although there was no sign of a fire.

When you combine an international event with the rapid dissemination of news on social media, too often you get loads of misinformation and, sometimes, completely fabricated conspiracy theories.\n\nUnfortunately, such is the case with the massive fire that nearly destroyed the historic Notre Dame cathedral in Paris on April 15.\n\nFrench authorities said they have not found evidence of arson and terrorism, and they are treating the fire as an accident that may be linked to an ongoing 6 million-euro renovation project on the church.\n\nThat still didn’t stop some internet users from suggesting it was some kind of terrorist act – as did one low-quality video clip posted to Facebook by the page "Equinox News Network."\n\nThe 18-second clip shows a man walking in one of the cathedral’s towers not long after the fire started. The video’s caption says: "No workers present at the time that the Notre Dame Cathedral fire started......So who is this guy dressed in Muslim garb??"\n\nThe video post was flagged as part of Facebook’s efforts to combat false news and misinformation on its News Feed. (Read more about our partnership with Facebook.)\n\nThe person in the picture isn’t dressed in "Muslim garb" — the person is a firefighter.\n\nThe clip was plucked from CNBC’s three-hour livestream of the fire and can be seen around the 42-minute mark.

Several false claims spread about the fire, including that it was intentional or terrorism-related.


\n\nGustavo Petro’s upcoming inauguration on August 7 as Colombia’s first left-wing president confirms an unmistakable trend in Latin American politics: Only five years after right-leaning leaders occupied presidential palaces in much of the region—including Chile, Bolivia, Argentina, Brazil, Colombia and Mexico—leftist candidates have won the vast majority of national elections and now govern all of the region’s major countries except Brazil, where former president Luiz Inácio Lula da Silva holds a comfortable lead less than 100 days ahead of the presidential election.\n\nThis “new pink tide” appears even more dominant than its predecessor in the 2000s that brought to power leaders like Argentina’s Cristina Kirchner, Bolivia’s Evo Morales and Venezuela’s Hugo Chávez. However, comparing the two cohorts reveals more differences than similarities.\n\nFirst, Latin American leaders in the mid-2000s enjoyed a commodity boom and, by the end of the decade, a significant U.S. interest rate reduction, which created an ideal macroeconomic environment for the region. These leaders were popular thanks to their increased public spending, and generally won reelection or succeeded in picking their successors.\n\nBy contrast, today’s leaders face a perfect storm of rising U.S. interest rates, geopolitical instability and limited fiscal space after a devastating pandemic that hit Latin America particularly hard. They must be the bearers of bad news, and thus generally suffer lower approval ratings. Given that the dominant political sentiment in Latin America today is—and will likely remain—anti-incumbent, the second pink tide will most likely be much shorter-lived than the first.

Brazil elects Luiz Inacio Lula da Silva.

While many had long proclaimed the death of the Pink Tide, the ouster of Bolivian President Evo Morales in 2019 was in some ways a nail in the coffin. The far-right government of Jeanine Áñez that followed unleashed the military on protesters, killing 30, persecuted those associated with the Morales government, threatened to privatize state industry, and disastrously mishandled the Covid-19 crisis. Yet just 12 months later, the Movement Toward Socialism (MAS) returned, this time with Morales’s former finance minister, Luis Arce, at the helm. With him, the commitment to a progressive agenda, albeit financed through expanding extractivism, has returned.  \n\nBy that time, Alberto Fernández had entered office in Argentina, ending a neoliberal reprise under Mauricio Macri. In Chile and Colombia, mass protests against inequality, neoliberalism, and repression at the hands of right-wing governments had begun to rattle the status quo. While six of the 11 countries that had elected left-leaning governments during the first 15 years of the 21st century remained in conservative hands, a new Left surge was building. \n\nSince 2018, voters in eight countries have chosen the Left. For Colombia and Mexico, these elections marked their first national left government of the 21st century; for Honduras, a previous shift to the left was cut short. Yet these groundbreaking wins are muddied by the outsized influence of the United States in these countries, largely because of Washington’s preoccupation with its domestic issues of immigration and drugs.

Mass protests against inequality, neoliberalism, and repression at the hands of right-wing governments began in Chile and Colombia.

\n\nWhen Luiz Inácio Lula da Silva (or Lula) won the Brazilian presidency in November 2022 by a slim 1.8% margin, Latin America’s leftward swing seemed complete. For the second time this century the region experienced a so-called “pink tide.”\n\nHowever, most polls indicate that the current shift is more of an anti-incumbent movement than it is a lasting ideological realignment. Put simply, conservative governments failed to deliver sufficient growth and were punished accordingly by voters.\n\nThe window of opportunity for a more concerted regional articulation built around common political goals may be narrow, but it is also one of the faster paths to better economic results.\n\nRegional Integration\n\nTake the Mercosur trading bloc comprised of Argentina, Brazil, Paraguay, and Uruguay (Venezuela is currently suspended, the remaining eight South American countries are associated members, while Mexico and New Zealand are observer members): it aims to establish full free trade and movement across the region and encompasses a territory of over 19.9 million sq. km (an area 15% larger than Russia and more than double that of the US). Though still an imperfect customs union and relegated to marginal status during the tenure of Lula’s predecessor Jair Bolsonaro, Mercosur delivered a combined GDP of over $5 trillion in 2022, making the bloc the world’s fifth largest economy.\n\nOther regional economic integration mechanisms include the creation of the Community of Latin American and Caribbean States (Celac) in 2010, the Union of South America (Unasur) in 2008, and the Latin American Integration Association (Aladi) in 1980.\n\n

In the past conservative governments failed to deliver sufficient growth.

\n\nFrom Mexico in the north to Chile in the south, the region\'s constantly see-sawing political map once again resembles that of the early 2000s, when a so-called "pink tide" of left-leaning governments washed over it.\n\nBut analysts say this time is different: the trend is driven by pragmatism rather than ideology.\n\n"It\'s not because Latin Americans are becoming more leftist. I don\'t think there\'s any evidence to support that," analyst Michael Shifter of the Inter-American Dialogue told AFP.\n\nIn their most recent election cycles, Latin American countries have resoundingly dethroned incumbent parties on the right and center-right of the political spectrum.\n\nHonduras, Bolivia and Argentina are among those to have turned their backs on the right, while Colombia in June elected its first leftist president despite a deep-rooted mistrust, as elsewhere in the region, of anything with perceived links to "communism."\n\nMany voters were jolted leftward by economic troubles and the devastating effects of the Covid-19 pandemic.\n\nVoters across the globe felt ignored, even denigrated, by the political establishment as poverty and inequality deepened.\n\n"It is more of a rejectionist trend than anything else... people looking for an alternative," said Shifter of the recent string of leftist victories.\n\n"It just so happens that we are in that moment in Latin America where a lot of the governments that are being rejected are of the right or the center right."

Economic crisis and the Covid-19 pandemic have reached Latin America.

\n\nDramatic elections in Brazil, Chile and Colombia brought leftist governments into power across much of Latin America in 2022, capping the region\'s second "pink tide" in two decades.\n\n However, their struggles amid stubborn economic headwinds suggest the wave may have crested. An anti-incumbent streak that lifted the left could soon swing major elections the other way.\n\nTo have the same staying power as the left-wing renaissance at the turn of the century, governments will need to reignite economies that have frustrated voters and investors alike during a decade of mostly mediocre growth.\n\nChilean President Gabriel Boric, 36, took office in March as his country\'s most progressive leader in half a century and its youngest ever. But setbacks including the rejection of a new constitution have dented his popularity and forced concessions to the center, including swapping some of the youthful cohort in his cabinet for more experienced establishment figures.\n\nColombia also swung sharply to the left with June\'s election of Gustavo Petro, a 62-year-old former guerrilla vowing to tackle inequality with tax and land reforms. He has shored up fiscal concerns with the former, but spooked investors with a proposed ban on new oil and gas exploration and second-guessing of central bank policy.\n\nBrazilian President-elect Luiz Inacio Lula da Silva, 77, who narrowly beat incumbent Jair Bolsonaro in October, is a holdover from the region\'s first pink tide, when a commodity boom helped him finish his 2003-2010 presidency with record approval.\n\nHowever, corruption scandals and economic mismanagement under his chosen successor tarred Lula\'s legacy.

Colombia elects Gustavo Petro, a 62-year-old former guerrilla.


\n\nEurope’s energy crisis is deepening as Russia further limits exports of natural gas, forcing governments to spend billions to protect businesses and consumers from soaring bills as the region slides towards recession.\n\nEuropean benchmark natural gas prices spiked 28% on Monday morning to hit €274 ($272) per megawatt hour — the first day of trading after Russian energy giant Gazprom halted flows through the vital Nord Stream 1 pipeline indefinitely, claiming it had found an oil leak in a turbine.\n\nLast year, the pipeline delivered about 35% of Europe’s total Russian gas imports. But since June, Gazprom had slashed flows along Nord Stream 1 to just 20% of its capacity, citing maintenance issues and a dispute over a missing turbine caught up in Western export sanctions.\n\nMoscow’s decision not to reopen the pipeline on Saturday stoked concerns that the European Union could run short of gas this winter, despite a successful effort to fill storage tanks. Similar fears in the United Kingdom sent wholesale natural gas futures up by more than a third on Monday.\n\nNews of the pipeline’s indefinite closure on Friday caused the euro to sink below $0.99 on Monday — its lowest level in 20 years. The pound hit $1.14, its lowest since 1985, as traders worried about the toll a potentially drastic energy shortage could have on regional economic activity and government budgets.\n\nSome countries are preparing to spend big to try to limit the pain.\n\nOn Sunday, the German government announced a €65 billion ($64 billion) relief package to help households and companies cope as inflation soars.\n\n

Governments to spend billions to protect businesses and consumers from soaring bills

Euro sinks below $0.99 and pound hits $1.14 due to fears of a drastic energy shortage.

\n\nEurope is struggling to contain an energy crisis that could lead to rolling blackouts, shuttered factories and a deep recession.\n\nThe primary cause: Russia has choked off the supplies of cheap natural gas that the continent depended on for years to run factories, generate electricity and heat homes. That has pushed European governments into a desperate scramble for new supplies and for ways to blunt the impact as economic growth slows and household utility bills rise.\n\nThe crisis deepened when Russia’s state-owned exporter Gazprom said the main pipeline carrying gas to Germany would stay closed, blaming an oil leak and claiming the problems could not be fixed because of sanctions barring many dealings with Russia.\n\nEuropean officials say it’s energy blackmail, aimed at pressuring and dividing the European Union as it supports Ukraine against Russia’s invasion.\n\nHere is the latest on Europe’s efforts to avoid an energy disaster:\n\nJust about. The halt in the Nord Stream 1 pipeline means Russian gas shipments have fallen 89% from a year ago. Russia used to supply 40% of Europe’s natural gas, and even more to Germany, where inexpensive energy was a pillar of the economy.\n\nThere’s still some Russian gas flowing to Europe through a pipeline passing through Ukraine into Slovakia, and another crossing the Black Sea to Turkey and then to EU member Bulgaria. Russia started cutting back gas as early as last summer, before the war in Ukraine started. That sent gas prices sharply higher.\n\n

Some Russian gas is still flowing to Europe through pipelines passing through Ukraine and Bulgaria.

\n\nFor the first time, global demand for each of the fossil fuels shows a peak or plateau across all WEO scenarios, with Russian exports in particular falling significantly as the world energy order is reshaped\n\nThe global energy crisis triggered by Russia’s invasion of Ukraine is causing profound and long-lasting changes that have the potential to hasten the transition to a more sustainable and secure energy system, according to the latest edition of the IEA’s World Energy Outlook.\n\nToday’s energy crisis is delivering a shock of unprecedented breadth and complexity. The biggest tremors have been felt in the markets for natural gas, coal and electricity – with significant turmoil in oil markets as well, necessitating two oil stock releases of unparalleled scale by IEA member countries to avoid even more severe disruptions. With unrelenting geopolitical and economic concerns, energy markets remain extremely vulnerable, and the crisis is a reminder of the fragility and unsustainability of the current global energy system, the World Energy Outlook 2022 (WEO) warns.\n\nThe WEO’s analysis finds scant evidence to support claims from some quarters that climate policies and net zero commitments contributed to the run-up in energy prices. In the most affected regions, higher shares of renewables were correlated with lower electricity prices – and more efficient homes and electrified heat have provided an important buffer for some consumers, albeit far from enough. The heaviest burden is falling on poorer households where a larger share of income is spent on energy.\n\n

Turmoil happened in natural gas, coal, electricity, and oil markets.


\n\n“The Silence Breakers”, the vanguard of a global movement by millions of women to share their stories of sexual harassment and abuse, was revealed on Wednesday to be Time magazine’s Person of the Year.\n\nThe announcement comes as many industries and power centers around the world are still reeling from an unprecedented reckoning with sexual harassment and abuse that came in the wake of the revelations about film mogul Harvey Weinstein in October.\n\nEven as the image of Time’s cover spread across the internet, Weinstein faced a fresh lawsuit on Wednesday from six women and, separately, a group of female US legislators publicly demanded Senator Al Franken resign over accusations that he groped constituents and co-workers.\n\nTime’s Person of the Year cover features Susan Fowler, a former Uber employee whose blog post about Silicon Valley sexism led to thedeparture of CEO Travis Kalanick; “Isabel Pascual”, a pseudonymous agricultural worker who has been stalked and harassed by her boss; and Adama Iwu, a corporate lobbyist who inspired dozens of women to expose sexual harassment in California’s state capitol.\n\nThere was also Ashley Judd, who was among the first women to accuse Weinstein of sexual harassment and Taylor Swift, who was celebrated for her testimony against a former DJ who she accused of groping. Just out of frame – only her arm is visible – is a hospital worker who wished to represent those who can’t speak out.\n\nAmong the many women featured inside Time’s story is Tarana Burke, the #MeToo movement’s creator.

Many of the reports of sexual assault related to people coming forward regarding past incidents

\n\nIt has created a wave of awareness and brave confrontations over sexual harassment and assault, taking down powerful men in the process. And now the #MeToo movement has been named Time magazine\'s Person of the Year for 2017.\n\nOn its cover, Time called the people behind the movement "The Silence Breakers." Its story features women and men who have spoken out — including activist Tarana Burke, who started the hashtag 10 years ago.\n\n#MeToo rose to prominence as a social media campaign in the wake of high-profile accusations against Hollywood producer Harvey Weinstein. After actress Alyssa Milano popularized the hashtag, thousands of women began sharing their stories about the pervasive damage wrought by sexual harassment and by "open secrets" about abuse.\n\nThe movement\'s empowering reach could be seen in the platform on which Time announced its choice: the Today show. It was just one week ago that NBC fired the morning program\'s longtime and powerful co-host, Matt Lauer, over a detailed complaint of "inappropriate sexual behavior in the workplace."\n\nWhile the most high-profile #MeToo stories have come from women and men who work in the movies and media, the Time article also features women who work hourly jobs, some of whom want to remain anonymous. The magazine\'s cover portrait includes strawberry picker Isabel Pascual, lobbyist Adama Iwu and former Uber engineer Susan Fowler along with Ashley Judd and Taylor Swift.\n\n

#MeToo movement named Time magazine's Person of the Year for 2017.

\n\nHollywood mogul Harvey Weinstein has been found guilty of rape and sexual assault by courts in New York and Los Angeles.\n\nHere is a summary of the key events that led him to court:\n\n- Weinstein issues an apology acknowledging he "has caused a lot of pain" - but disputes allegations he harassed female employees over nearly three decades.\n\n- It is announced that Harvey Weinstein has been sacked by the board of his company, with immediate effect. \n\n- The organisation behind the Oscars votes to expel Weinstein. The Academy of Motion Picture Arts and Sciences says: "What\'s at issue here is a deeply troubling problem that has no place in our society."\n\n- Weinstein\'s former company files for bankruptcy, months after the Oscar-winning producer was accused of multiple sexual assaults.\n\n- Weinstein faces fresh sexual assault charges in New York from a third woman, in a case dating back to 2006.\n\n- After five days of deliberation, the jury finds Weinstein guilty of a criminal sexual act in the first degree and third-degree rape.\n\n- Weinstein goes on trial in LA, facing 11 charges involving five alleged victims.\n\n- Weinstein is found guilty by a Los Angeles jury of raping a woman.\n

Weinstein faces fresh sexual assault charges in New York.

\n\nIt’s the hashtag that rocked the world.\n\nSince #MeToo went viral two weeks ago in the wake of sexual harassment allegations against producer Harvey Weinstein, Twitter reports that more than 1.7 million women and men have used the hashtag in 85 countries.\n\nIn Italy, women rallied behind a version called #QuellaVoltaChe, which translates to “That time when,” while French women decided to out their harassers by name under #BalanceTonPorc, which roughly translates to “snitch out your pig.”\n\nAt least nine well-known powerful men have been accused of various forms of sexual assault, including former President George H.W. Bush, Hollywood producer James Toback and journalist and author Mark Halperin. And just last week, California Rep. Jackie Speier launched #MeTooCongress, asking Washington staffers to share their stories on harassment on the Hill.\n\nBut can a hashtag, a meme or any viral moment – no matter how widespread – really turn into a lasting movement that that will create social change and reduce sexual abuse of women?\n\nMaybe. But experts say it’s going to take a coordinated effort between antiviolence organizations, the media and Hollywood as well as concrete actions from each and every one of us, especially men.\n\n“I am really tired of talking about women,” said Toni Van Pelt, president of the National Association of Women. “We must focus on the men. We must be demanding that the men step forward and take responsibility, whether they think they are the good guy or not.


Gwyneth Paltrow\'s attorneys asked the daughter of a man suing the actor-turned-lifestyle influencer over a 2016 ski collision about missing GoPro camera footage that they called "the most important piece of evidence" at trial Thursday.\n\nSteve Owens, Paltrow\'s attorney, asked one of the man\'s daughters, Polly Grasham, about emails exchanged with her father about the mysterious footage and the possibility that the lawsuit was filed against Paltrow because she was famous.\n\nThe GoPro footage has not been found or included as evidence for the trial.\n\n"I\'m famous ... At what cost?" Terry Sanderson, the 76-year-old retired optometrist suing Paltrow, wrote in the subject line of an email to his family after the crash.\n\nSanderson is suing Paltrow for more than $300,000 in damages, claiming that she skied recklessly into him on a beginner run at Deer Valley Resort seven years ago, breaking his ribs and leaving him with a concussion. Paltrow has claimed Sanderson caused the crash and countersued for $1 and attorney fees.\n\nThe trial took on an increasingly personal note on the third day of proceedings when Sanderson\'s daughter and a neuropsychologist testified about his declining health.\n\nSanderson\'s attorneys tried to persuade jurors that the collision had changed the course of their client\'s life, leaving him brain-impaired and damaging his relationships with loved ones.\n\nPaltrow\'s attorneys questioned whether Grasham and neuropsychologist Dr. Alina Fong could say with certainty that Sanderson\'s downturn wasn\'t a result of aging or documented, pre-crash conditions.

Paltrow testified in court in Utah on Friday after being sued in ski crash

The trial over a 2016 ski accident involving actor and businesswoman Gwyneth Paltrow wrapped up Thursday, with the jury ruling that she was not responsible for the collision at a Utah ski resort.\n\nAfter a short deliberation, the jury concluded that plaintiff Terry Sanderson was entirely at fault for the collision, with the decision ultimately hinging on which party jurors believed was higher on the slopes when the crash occurred. \n\nSanderson, 76, sued Paltrow for $3.1 million after alleging that she crashed into him at the tony Deer Valley resort in Park City, Utah. After a judge dismissed his initial suit, he later refiled his complaint seeking more than $300,000. Paltrow, 50, countersued for a symbolic $1 and attorney fees.\n\nIn each taking the stand last week, Paltrow and Sanderson presented starkly different accounts of the collision and called a succession of medical experts and witnesses to buttress their claims. Paltrow\'s ski instructor at the time of the incident, Deer Valley veteran Eric Christiansen, blamed Sanderson for the crash, which occurred on a beginner ski run. \n\n\n"Gwyneth was making her turns very rhythmically," he said under oath, while alleging that Sanderson "was making wide radius turns and taking up a large swath of the ski slope."\n\nFor his part, Sanderson has accused Paltrow of barreling into him, breaking four of his ribs and causing a severe concussion whose symptoms lingered for years.

Gwyneth's ski instructor testified on her behalf that Sanderson was taking up a large swath of the ski slope.

Gwyneth Paltrow is on trial over a 2016 ski accident in Utah involving a retired optometrist who claims he suffered life-altering injuries.\n\nTerry Sanderson, 76, says the Hollywood actress was distracted and caused the crash. He is seeking $300,000 (£245,000) in damages.\n\nMs Paltrow, 50, denies the charge, and has countersued for $1 plus compensation for attorneys\' fees.\n\nMr Sanderson first filed suit against Ms Paltrow in 2019, three years after their collision.\n\nThe former US army captain and optometrist, who says he has never been injured in more than 30 years of skiing, accuses the Oscar winner of being "reckless" and racing into him from behind on a beginner slope at the upscale Deer Valley Resort in western Utah.\n\nLawyers for Mr Sanderson, who was 69 at the time, allege Ms Paltrow was distracted by her children and emitted a "blood-curdling scream" before landing on top of him, then left him "lying in the snow" without calling for help.\n\nHe claims the February 2016 crash left him unconscious, and that he suffered a traumatic brain injury and four broken ribs, as well as "loss of enjoyment of life, emotional distress and disfigurement".\n\nHe initially sought $3.1m over what he deems a "hit and run", but that lawsuit was dismissed last May.\n\nHe took the stand twice during the trial, defending himself against allegations he is trying to exploit a celebrity.\n\n\nA movie star-turned-lifestyle influencer, Ms Paltrow rejects the plaintiff\'s version of events and alleges he skied directly into her back.

Paltrow has counter-sued for $1 plus lawyers fees.

Public opinion of actress Gwyneth Paltrow seems to have changed following her big win in a ski collision lawsuit.\n\nPaltrow was sued by retired optometrist Terry Sanderson in 2019 over a ski crash that he claimed left him severely injured. However, a jury ruled that the Goop founder was not at fault for the accident and awarded her $1 in damages Thursday. Sanderson himself was found to be 100% at fault for the collision.\n\nPrior to the ski collision trial, which lasted for eight days in Utah state court, Paltrow had received an interesting reaction from the public. The Oscar-winning actress has faced tremendous backlash over the years for her beliefs and comments, including the recent drama over her "starvation diet." \n\nPaltrow also came under fire when she announced she and ex-husband Chris Martin planned to "consciously uncouple" rather than divorce after 10 years of marriage. \n\nThe lawsuit, brought against Paltrow by Sanderson, was seen by some – including PR expert Dave Quast – to be "extremely opportunistic."\n\nCelebrity branding expert and founder of Achilles PR Doug Eldridge explained that Paltrow chose to be "authentic" and as an actress chose to play herself throughout this trial. "She took a positive PR bump post trial for four reasons: 1) she won, 2) she countersued for $1 dollar (along with what is likely mid-six figures in legal fees), 3) her answers were ridiculous, and 4) her courtroom wardrobe was strategic and effective."

Paltrow was criticized by the public for promoting starvation diets and her ideas on conscious uncoupling

Gwyneth Paltrow\'s ski crash trial came to an end Thursday when a jury sided with the actor, saying she was not at fault for a 2016 collision at Utah’s Deer Valley Resort that injured a retired optometrist.\n\nTerry Sanderson sued Paltrow for $300,000, alleging that reckless skiing caused her to run into him from behind on Feb. 26, 2016. Sanderson said he suffered four broken ribs, a concussion and lasting brain damage that affected his daily life and personal relationships.\n\nPaltrow, who has repeatedly denied running into Sanderson, countersued for $1 and her legal fees.\n\nThe trial went on for more than a week. The jury deliberated for just a few hours before deciding that Sanderson, not Paltrow, was at fault.\n\nHere’s a timeline of the events that led up to the court case, and memorable moments from trial.\n\nSanderson filed a lawsuit on Jan. 29, 2019, saying that Paltrow was skiing "out of control" when she hit him from behind, knocked him down, and then landed on top of him. He said after the collision, the actor got up and skied away and did not offer any help.\n\nHe was initially seeking more than $3.1 million but amended it to $300,000.\n\nSanderson said it took him three years to file the suit because his legal team could not come to a resolution after meeting with Paltrow and her attorney.

Gwyneth Paltrow was skiing at the Deer Valley Resort when she collided with retired optometrist, Terry Sanderson.


Weinstein was sentenced after a criminal conviction in New York in 2020.

\n\nPresident Donald Trump mocked the #MeToo movement again at his rally in Pennsylvania on Wednesday night, citing the “rules of MeToo” as the reason he wasn’t “allowed” to use an expression.\n\nWhen talking about winning the state in the 2016 presidential election Trump said, “Pennsylvania hasn’t been won for many years by Republicans, but every Republican thinks they’re going to win Pennsylvania. … I used an expression – you know, there’s an expression but under the rules of MeToo I’m not allowed to use that expression anymore. I can’t do it.”\n\n“It’s the person that got away,” Trump continued. “See, in the old days, it was a little different,” the President added, laughing as a rally attendee told him from the crowd to “do it anyway.”\n\n“I would do it, except for these people up there,” Trump said, pointing at the cameras and press at the rally. “They would say, did you hear what President Trump said?”\n\nHe continued, “So there is an expression, but we’ll change the expression: Pennsylvania was always the person who got away, that’s pretty good, right, the person that got away?”\n\nIt’s another shot at the movement that began following the publication of sexual harassment and assault allegations against Hollywood producer Harvey Weinstein in October 2017.

President Donald Trump mocked the #MeToo movement at a rally in Pennsylvania on Wednesday night.

Producer Harvey Weinstein was accused of sexual harassment.