Sister Pie temporarily halts daily operations
Famed Detroit bakery Sister Pie is halting its daily operations for now, in part because the business isn't working financially, its owner says.
Why it matters: The West Village bakery draws long lines, has been lauded nationally and is seen as an anchor in its neighborhood, but it's still struggling, reflecting the wider difficulties many local small business owners face.
Driving the news: Starting June 9, the business will close and "enter a period of rest and radical reconfiguration, of exploration and experimentation," owner Lisa Ludwinski announced on Instagram.
It will host occasional pop-ups and events, and continue with special orders and classes, she wrote.
There's not an exact timeline set for resuming daily hours.
What they're saying:"As a business owner and a leader, I'm learning, reminiscing, mourning, growing and searching for hope in the midst of challenge and chaos," Ludwinski wrote.
Catch up quick: Sister Pie opened in 2015 and started offering pie dough classes in 2016. Ludwinski released a cookbook in 2018 that topped the New York Times' list of the year's best baking books.
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Yahoo
4 hours ago
- Yahoo
Meta in Talks for Scale AI Investment That Could Top $10 Billion
(Bloomberg) -- Meta Platforms Inc. is in talks to make a multibillion-dollar investment into artificial intelligence startup Scale AI, according to people familiar with the matter. Next Stop: Rancho Cucamonga! Where Public Transit Systems Are Bouncing Back Around the World ICE Moves to DNA-Test Families Targeted for Deportation with New Contract Trump Said He Fired the National Portrait Gallery Director. She's Still There. US Housing Agency Vulnerable to Fraud After DOGE Cuts, Documents Warn The financing could exceed $10 billion in value, some of the people said, making it one of the largest private company funding events of all time. The terms of the deal are not finalized and could still change, according to the people, who asked not to be identified discussing private information. Representatives for Scale and Meta declined to comment. Scale AI, whose customers include Microsoft Corp. and OpenAI, provides data labeling services to help companies train machine-learning models and has become a key beneficiary of the generative AI boom. The startup was last valued at about $14 billion in 2024, in a funding round that included backing from Meta and Microsoft. Earlier this year, Bloomberg reported that Scale was in talks for a tender offer that would value it at $25 billion. This would be Meta's biggest ever external AI investment, and a rare move for the company. The social media giant has before now mostly depended on its in-house research, plus a more open development strategy, to make improvements in its AI technology. Meanwhile, Big Tech peers have invested heavily: Microsoft has put more than $13 billion into OpenAI while both Inc. and Alphabet Inc. have put billions into rival Anthropic. Part of those companies' investments have been through credits to use their computing power. Meta doesn't have a cloud business, and it's unclear what format Meta's investment will take. Chief Executive Officer Mark Zuckerberg has made AI Meta's top priority, and said in January that the company would spend as much as $65 billion on related projects this year. The company's push includes an effort to make Llama the industry standard worldwide. Meta's AI chatbot — already available on Facebook, Instagram and WhatsApp — is used by 1 billion people per month. Scale, co-founded in 2016 by CEO Alexandr Wang, has been growing quickly: The startup generated revenue of $870 million last year and expects sales to more than double to $2 billion in 2025, Bloomberg previously reported. Scale plays a key role in making AI data available for companies. Because AI is only as good as the data that goes into it, Scale uses scads of contract workers to tidy up and tag images, text and other data that can then be used for AI training. Scale and Meta share an interest in defense tech. Last week, Meta announced a new partnership with defense contractor Anduril Industries Inc. to develop products for the US military, including an AI-powered helmet with virtual and augmented reality features. Meta has also granted approval for US government agencies and defense contractors to use its AI models. The company is already partnering with Scale on a program called Defense Llama — a version of Meta's Llama large language model intended for military use. Scale has increasingly been working with the US government to develop AI for defense purposes. Earlier this year the startup said it won a contract with the Defense Department to work on AI agent technology. The company called the contract 'a significant milestone in military advancement.' The SEC Pinned Its Hack on a Few Hapless Day Traders. The Full Story Is Far More Troubling Cavs Owner Dan Gilbert Wants to Donate His Billions—and Walk Again Is Elon Musk's Political Capital Spent? What Does Musk-Trump Split Mean for a 'Big, Beautiful Bill'? Cuts to US Aid Imperil the World's Largest HIV Treatment Program ©2025 Bloomberg L.P. Sign in to access your portfolio
Yahoo
5 hours ago
- Yahoo
Gerry Adams's lawyer to pursue chatbots for libel
The high-profile media lawyer who represented Gerry Adams in his libel trial against the BBC is now preparing to sue the world's most powerful AI chatbots for defamation. As one of the most prominent libel lawyers in the UK, Paul Tweed said that artificial intelligence was the 'new battleground' in trying to prevent misinformation about his clients from being spread online. Mr Tweed is turning his attention to tech after he recently helped the former Sinn Fein leader secure a €100,000 (£84,000) payout over a BBC documentary that falsely claimed he sanctioned the murder of a British spy. The Belfast-based solicitor said he was already building a test case against Meta that could trigger a flurry of similar lawsuits, as he claims to have exposed falsehoods shared by chatbots on Facebook and Instagram. It is not the first time tech giants have been sued for defamation over questionable responses spewed out by their chatbots. Robby Starbuck, the US activist known for targeting diversity schemes at major companies, has sued Meta for defamation alleging that its AI chatbot spread a number of false claims about him, including that he took part in the Capitol riots. A Norwegian man also filed a complaint against OpenAI after its ChatGPT software incorrectly stated that he had killed two of his sons and been jailed for 21 years. Mr Tweed, who has represented celebrities such as Johnny Depp, Harrison Ford and Jennifer Lopez, said: 'My pet subject is generative AI and the consequences of them repeating or regurgitating disinformation and misinformation.' He believes statements put out by AI chatbots fall outside the protections afforded to social media companies, which have traditionally seen them avoid liability for libel. If successful, Mr Tweed will expose social media companies that have previously argued they should not be responsible for claims made on their platforms because they are technology companies rather than traditional publishers. Mr Tweed said: 'I've been liaising with a number of well-known legal professors on both sides of the Atlantic and they agree that there's a very strong argument that generative AI will fall outside the legislative protections.' The lawyer said that chatbots are actually creating new content, meaning they should be considered publishers. He said that the decision by many tech giants to move their headquarters to Ireland for lower tax rates had also opened them up to being sued in Dublin's high courts, where libel cases are typically decided by a jury. This setup is often seen as more favourable to claimants, which Mr Tweed himself says has fuelled a wave of 'libel tourism' in Ireland. He also said Dublin's high courts are attractive as a lower price option compared to London, where he said the costs of filing libel claims are 'eye-watering'. He said: 'I think it's absurd now, the level of costs that are being claimed. The libel courts in London are becoming very, very expensive and highly risky now. The moment you issue your claim form, the costs go into the stratosphere. 'It's not in anyone's interest for people to be deprived of access to justice. It will get to the point where nobody sues for libel unless you're a billionaire.' Meta was contacted for comment. Broaden your horizons with award-winning British journalism. Try The Telegraph free for 1 month with unlimited access to our award-winning website, exclusive app, money-saving offers and more.
Miami Herald
6 hours ago
- Miami Herald
Lululemon rival facing $150 million lawsuit (blame influencers)
After months of seeing the same brand pop up again and again on Instagram, I finally caved. Everyone from fitness influencers to lifestyle creators seemed to be wearing the same sleek sweatpants and cropped sweatshirt set. I wanted in. I didn't just stumble upon it - I made a special trip to the store just to try it on. The influencers had done their job: I already felt like I needed it. At first, it lived up to the hype. The fabric was buttery soft, and I found myself reaching for it constantly. Related: Lululemon's latest viral product reveals something much bigger But after one wash, the magic faded. The softness disappeared, replaced by an average feel that left me a little disappointed. I still wear the set because it's cute (and let's be honest, I paid a premium for it), but it no longer feels like heaven against my skin. Now? It's just... meh. Experiences like mine aren't uncommon in the influencer era. But now, one popular yoga brand is facing more than just a few dissatisfied customers. A newly filed $150 million class action lawsuit accuses the company (and more than a dozen influencers) of misleading consumers through undisclosed paid endorsements. The message? Trust is expensive. And this brand may soon learn that the hard way. Image source: Koerner/Getty Images Turns out, I'm not the only one rethinking that hype-driven purchase. The lawsuit, filed last week, targets none other than Alo Yoga. Plaintiffs argue Alo's rise was fueled by influencers blurring the line between paid promo and personal praise. Personally, I call it sexy deception. The 38-page complaint alleges Alo has built its brand and customer base primarily through social media marketing, according to Lexology, Roughly 90% of the company's revenue is attributed to online sales and its Alo Moves platform-and much of that success, plaintiffs claim, comes from influencer promotions that misrepresent paid endorsements as authentic, unpaid opinions. Related: Nike's house is not in order, and customers may pay the price Plaintiffs say they purchased Alo products after seeing Instagram posts from influencers they trusted. The posts included glowing endorsements and tagged Alo products-but allegedly lacked the legally required material connection disclosures. The plaintiffs argue that they paid a premium based on the perceived impartiality of these influencers, only to later feel misled about the true value of the products. In short: this isn't some slap-on-the-wrist lawsuit. If the plaintiffs succeed, Alo and its influencers could be on the hook for more than $150 million-and a big chunk of their brand equity. This lawsuit is more than a legal headache - it's a gut punch to Alo's brand image. It's also a huge flashing red warning sign for every influencer-heavy brand out there. Transparency in influencer marketing isn't just an ethical best practice, it's a legal requirement. The Federal Trade Commission (FTC) mandates clear, conspicuous disclosures of material connections between brands and influencers. Anything less can open the door to lawsuits, regulatory fines, and loss of consumer trust. And let's be real: too many brands (and influencers) still play fast and loose with those pesky disclosure rules. In the relentless pursuit of growth, the temptation to make paid content feel "organic" is strong. But as this case shows, the legal and reputational costs of cutting corners can be enormous. This case isn't an outlier. It's a preview. Brands should take note: clear disclosures don't have to ruin the authenticity of influencer content. In fact, they can enhance it-building credibility with increasingly savvy audiences. Failing to do so, however, risks turning a viral marketing win into a $150 million cautionary tale. As class actions targeting influencer marketing continue to rise, the message to brands is simple: get your house in order, or brace for the kind of backlash money can't fix. Related: Steve Madden files wild lawsuit against Adidas The Arena Media Brands, LLC THESTREET is a registered trademark of TheStreet, Inc.
