Astronomer CEO Steps Down After Coldplay Cam Clip Goes Viral
The clip, caught on the big screen at Gillette Stadium, sparked a flood of online chatter and internal buzz that eventually led to Byron stepping down.
Astronomer Responds
In a post on social media, Astronomer's board said it accepted Byron's resignation and is now on the hunt for a new CEO. They also cleared up a few rumors—mainly that Byron hasn't made any official public statement, despite what some posts online claim.
The company even had to fact-check internet sleuths who misidentified a third person in the video. (No, that wasn't who you thought it was.)
New CEO (For Now)
Astronomer named Pete DeJoy, co-founder and current Chief Product Officer, as interim CEO. Meanwhile, Byron's LinkedIn account went private and his name disappeared from the leadership page—though he still shows up on the board list.
Company Stance on the Drama
Astronomer made it clear: 'Our leaders are expected to set the standard in both conduct and accountability—and recently, that standard was not met.'
The company, which works in AI and data solutions, admitted they probably became more 'publicly known' overnight—but their mission, they say, hasn't changed.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Khaleej Times
3 hours ago
- Khaleej Times
US Federal Reserve maintains benchmark interest rate
The US Federal Reserve on Wednesday held its benchmark interest rate, despite President Donald Trump's pressure to reduce borrowing costs. At the end of the two-day meeting of the Federal Open Markets Committee, the US central bank announced that it had decided to maintain the federal funds rate at 4.25 per cent to 4.5 per cent. Analysts stress that Trump's suggestion of cutting rates to as low as one per cent is far out of line with economic realities. While the US economy expanded at a higher than expected pace of 3 per cent in Q2, the Fed said it remains wary about inflation pressures, which still remains above the target of 2 per cent.
The National
3 hours ago
- The National
Federal Reserve holds US interest rates despite Trump pressure
A divided Federal Reserve held US interest rates steady on Wednesday, even as President Donald Trump intensified his pressure campaign on the central bank to lower borrowing costs. The Fed's target range remained set at 4.25 to 4.50 per cent following the central bank's decision to extend its rate-cut pause for a fifth consecutive month. The UAE Central Bank, which follows Fed decisions because of the dollar peg, also maintained its base rate at 4.4 per cent following the US central bank's announcement. "Although swings in net exports continue to affect the data, recent indicators suggest that growth of economic activity moderated in the first half of the year," the Fed said in a statement. Fed governors Christopher Waller and Michelle Bowman dissented, preferring to lower the target range by 25 basis points. It was the first time in more than two decades that two Fed governors dissented on a policy decision. Fed officials have adopted a 'wait-and-see' approach in policy decisions this year after cutting rates by 100 basis points in 2024. Mr Trump's trade, fiscal and immigration agendas have raised expectations among most economists that a trend in moderating inflation could change course, and that economic growth and the jobs market could weaken if the administration follows through with its policies. Earlier on Wednesday, Mr Trump seized on a better-than-expected GDP report to demand lower interest rates. '2Q GDP JUST OUT: 3%, WAY BETTER THAN EXPECTED! 'Too Late' MUST NOW LOWER THE RATE. No Inflation! Let people buy, and refinance, their homes!' he wrote on the Truth Social media platform. Trump pressure The President claims that reducing the federal funds rate to 1 per cent would save the US $1 trillion on interest costs to help service the national debt – a concept known as fiscal dominance. However, data from the Federal Reserve Bank of St Louis showed the US spent $1.1 trillion in interest on its debt last year. So far, Mr Trump's unrelenting demands to lower rates have had no effect on Federal Reserve chairman Jerome Powell or his colleagues. And even Fed members who have called for rate cuts have suggested doing so at a far more moderate pace than what Mr Trump wants. Mr Trump's attacks have tested the independence of the Fed, which is a quasi-private institution that presidents typically do not interfere with. Tension between Mr Trump and Mr Powell spilt out in public last week when the two bickered over the Fed's renovation costs at its headquarters in Washington. Some observers believe that Mr Trump is using the project's cost overruns as a pretext to fire the Mr Powell, although the President said he does not believe firing Mr Powell is necessary. Mr Powell and his 11 colleagues on the rate-setting Federal Open Market Committee (FOMC) entered this week divided on interest rates. Two members had publicly backed cutting rates now in the weeks leading up to the July meeting, while others expressed a desire to wait for greater clarity on tariffs' impact on the economy. A separate camp argued that rates should remain steady until there is clear weakening in the labour market. While Mr Trump has demanded rate cuts, his tariff agenda is likely to have had the opposite effect. Fed officials have repeatedly said they want greater clarity on the new tariffs' effects on the economy before moving to cut rates again. Mr Powell has also said the Fed would have cut rates by now were it not for the uncertainty caused by the tariffs. The effective US tariff rate today is 18.2 per cent, the highest since 1934, according to The Budget Lab at Yale. Economists argue businesses will eventually pass those costs on to consumers, and the Fed has suggested such prices could be seen this summer. Mr Powell has previously warned higher costs could come this summer. And he has exercised extreme caution towards cutting interest rates in the face of Mr Trump's tariffs after nearly returning inflation back to its 2 per cent goal following a post-pandemic price surge. The Personal Consumption Expenditures (PCE) Price Index rose to as high as 7 per cent in June 2022 before moderating to its current 2.3 per cent rate – although still above the Fed's long-term goal. Fed divisions Debates within the Fed were expected to centre on which side of the central bank's dual mandate would require immediate attention. Unlike other central banks, the Fed is tasked with promoting price stability and maximum unemployment. Heading into this week's two-day meeting, though, policymakers were still more concerned about the inflationary impact of tariffs and whether businesses would handle or pass the costs associated with the new tariffs. Mr Waller has been among the minority of Fed officials in favour of cutting rates this month, arguing that they need to move soon before the labour market further weakens. Recent data showed that the labour market as being in a state of stasis with both hiring and quit rates near historic lows, even as the unemployment rate remains stable at 4.1 per cent. Separate data showed that tariffs are beginning to appear in some aspects of the economy. Inflation data released this month showed the prices of everyday products like toys and household appliances increased last month in a sign that costs are beginning to be passed on to consumers. A report from the Commerce Department earlier on Wednesday showed the US GDP also bounced back in the second quarter after businesses had stocked up on imports – which are subtracted from the measure of economic activity – in the first quarter. And while consumer spending rose from 0.5 per cent to 1.4 per cent, business and residential investment dipped. Final sales to private domestic purchasers, meanwhile, slowed from 1.9 per cent in the first quarter to 1.2 per cent in the second quarter. Fed officials were expected to receive more information this week including inflation and unemployment data from June on Thursday and Friday, respectively.
The National
4 hours ago
- The National
Google, Chrome and default settings: what's at stake for Alphabet's anti-trust remedy
An antitrust remedy decision that could bring an end to Google's search dominance is expected soon. During closing arguments in late May, US District Judge Amit Mehta indicated he would be likely to release his remedy order for Google by early August. According to court filings, Mr Mehta on Tuesday asked the search company to file a brief to clarify an issue related to device manufacturers who have agreed to use the company's Chrome browser by default. Mr Mehta gave Google until August 1 to file the brief, which likely means he is nearing a decision. Because of lengthy litigation, which began in 2020, followed by the remedy portion of the trial, which began this year, it's easy to forget that Mr Mehta had decided in late 2024 that Alphabet-owned Google unfairly used its search monopoly to hurt competition, and as a result, harm consumers. And in a separate antitrust case, Google was also found to have unfairly boxed out competition in search advertising by coupling its publisher advertising server and advertising exchange technologies. The search giant is appealing part of that decision. Throughout the remedy portion of the trial, which heard testimony from technology executives, economists and regulatory experts, the Justice Department made clear that it wants Mr Mehta to enact far-reaching penalties against Google that would be a warning to other companies, while also providing more choice for consumers. Federal prosecutors want Google to divest its Chrome browser from its portfolio, and it wants the tech giant to share coveted search data with competitors. Yet, Google and its bench heavy with lawyers have pushed for a far less stringent remedy that would allow it to retain control of its Chrome browser, while also giving device manufacturers, and ultimately users, more windows of opportunity to change their default search provider within browsers. 'Our proposal allows browsers to continue to offer Google Search to their users and earn revenue from that partnership … but it also provides them with additional flexibility,' Google said during closing arguments in May. The decision has browser companies like Mozilla, maker of the Firefox browser, walking a tightrope between wanting more market share amid Google's Chrome dominance, and also not upsetting existing revenue streams provided by contracts with Google. 'Essentially, the remedies may hand even more power to Big Tech, threatening long-term competition and the health of the open web,' read an email from a public relations firm hired by Mozilla. Google's influence is unrivalled and its deep pockets have allowed it to secure a presence on various devices through lucrative contracts with companies like Apple. Depending on the severity of the remedy, Apple could lose out on reoccurring payments from Google. Eddy Cue, one of Apple's senior executives, took the witness box during the remedy hearings in May, claiming that Google's power was beginning to erode, with users starting to pivot from search engines to AI chatbots. Sceptics of antitrust intervention might look at those comments and say that a harsh penalty on Google would be superfluous, and that the free market should be allowed to, eventually, dethrone the company. Others, however, might point to the wealth that's been stockpiled from Google's search dominance, and how that wealth has enabled the company to create an arsenal of AI technologies like Gemini and its research division DeepMind, and that the Alphabet-owned company would just find ways to abuse its power in the emerging sector. Mark MacCarthy, a senior fellow at the Institute for Technology Law and Policy at Georgetown University in Washington, who has studied antitrust policy for several decades, acknowledged in a previous interview with The National that Google's dominance presents a unique challenge for Mr Mehta. He said that with Google's recent antitrust defeat over its advertising business and the forthcoming decision related to browsers and search dominance, there could be a large amount of co-operation between the courts involved. But Prof MacCarthy said that the current regulatory agencies might not be up to the challenge of properly enforcing the remedy. 'My view is that this would be better done by a new digital regulatory agency,' he said. That said, given the sweeping layoffs in the federal government under President Donald Trump, there's little indication that the White House has any appetite for a new regulatory agency. All of the moving parts, combined with a dismantling of the federal workforce, invariably forces Mr Mehta to approach his decision with delicacy, and it will also likely work in Google's favour. Yet, even if the remedy is all bark and no bite, it could be enough of a distraction that a technology company like Google dreads amid a rapid rise in competitors.
