Sickos.jpg
A weekly newsletter by David Pierce designed to tell you everything you need to download, watch, read, listen to, and explore that fits in The Verge's universe.
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Forbes
2 minutes ago
- Forbes
Founder Poaching: 3 Major Impacts On Entrepreneurs & Venture Capital
What would have happened if Gates, Bezos, and Zuckerberg had been poached mid-journey by IBM, Borders, and MySpace? These founder moves could have shaken the foundation of venture capital's most profitable model. Two billion-dollar founders have made moves that may redefine how Silicon Valley and venture capital operate. They walked away from their ventures, where they were the CEOs, in the middle of the journey. These aren't CEOs cashing out after an IPO or a strategic sale. They're visionary entrepreneurs in their prime who are leaving mid-journey to join the very tech giants they set out to disrupt. One online commentator called it 'a break in Silicon Valley's social contract.' For venture capitalists, it's more than that. It's a threat to the model that drives their returns and a sign that the old rules may be changing. Why Unicorn Founders Matter Venture capital is powered by extreme outliers. Out of 100,000 startups, only about 100 get VC funding. Of those, about 80 ventures fail, 19 are successes, and one becomes a unicorn, delivering the outsized returns that justify an entire VC fund. And that unicorn almost always hinges on the founder. In my study of 87 billion-dollar entrepreneurs, 94% succeeded because of the founder's vision and leadership, not a professional CEO hired later. Leaders like Bill Gates, Jeff Bezos, and Mark Zuckerberg attracted top-tier VCs because they'd already proven their ability to dominate emerging markets. Without these rare 'Unicorn-Entrepreneurs,' the VC model weakens. The best-performing 20–30 firms, which generate roughly 95% of U.S. VC profits, depend on just a handful of unicorns each. ( and on the founders. Do the odds change when the founders leave before a very high-valuation exit? The Major Impacts of Founder Poaching Currently, VCs replace the founder in nearly 4 out of 5 ventures, especially when the venture seeks multiple rounds of financing ( But that is under the control of the VCs and based on their analysis of the venture's needs. Now, it's the proven founders, not the VCs, who are walking away mid-journey. What would the VCs have to do to offset this new risk, especially when the VCs often invest because of the proven strategic skills and leadership potential of the Unicorn-Entrepreneur? Here are 3 likely impacts if the pattern continues: #1. Valuations Will Adjust. VCs pay a premium for founder-led unicorns because the founder's continued leadership is a key part of the growth story. If poaching becomes a trend, investors may discount valuations to account for the risk of losing that edge. #2. Deal Terms Will Tighten. Expect to see more contractual protections, designed to lock in founders, from extended vesting schedules to 'golden handcuffs' tied to milestones and profitable exits. #3. Startups Will Need New Retention Strategies Equity alone may no longer be enough. Startups may have to offer greater strategic and operational freedom, board influence, or mission-driven commitments to keep visionary founders from leaving. MY TAKE: Founder poaching isn't just a talent war story; it's a systemic risk. If leaders like Wang and Mohan can be lured away before a profitable exit, venture capital faces higher uncertainty. In Silicon Valley, ideas are plentiful. The ability to execute to build unicorns is rare. Lose those unicorn-founders, and you risk losing the ecosystem's edge.
CNET
3 minutes ago
- CNET
Get Coffee-Shop Quality Espresso Drinks at Home and Save $300 on This Philips Coffee Machine
If you're a coffee person, you know the difference between a mediocre and a great coffee drink. And sure, you can brew a satisfactory cup of joe with any number of good coffee makers. But if you're a coffee connoisseur and you want a little variety in your morning routine, then this deal's for you. Right now Amazon has Philips excellent 3200 Series espresso machine on sale for a hefty 38% off, which translates to $300 in savings. That puts the sticker price at $500, an amount we've seen during Black Friday 2024 and July's Prime Day event. Typically, the espresso machine hovers at around $800 when it isn't on sale, so that should give you an idea of how good a bargain you're getting. Heading to Amazon is certainly the easiest way to get the discount. Even considering the savings, $500 is a lot, so let's dive into what this espresso machine can do. Philips says it can make coffee in five different ways, including regular coffee, espresso, cappuccino, americano and latte macchiato. You may notice that some of those require frothing milk, which the machine can also do. There's a milk frother attachment that doesn't use any tubes or hidden pieces, which makes it easy to clean. The frother attachment is included, so you don't have to shop around for one. Along with the five types of coffee, you also have a hot water option if you want to make tea or some other toasty beverage. There are also two cleaning settings, along with some other options. The device boasts a 12-step ceramic grinder, so you can choose how fine your grind is. The reason it didn't make our list of the best coffee makers is mostly due to price. It has all the chops and features to be included otherwise. CNET can help you find deals. Sign up for our free texts. They're fast, easy, and will let you continue living life while we do the work in finding you deals. We understand, though, if you're looking at the price and thinking it's still not low enough. Along with our coffee maker list linked above, we have an espresso machine list with a less expensive option. Why this deal matters There are a bunch of coffee makers out there, so what makes the Philips model stand out? For starters, its ability to make espresso and regular coffee, along with the other types of drinks, gives you an all-in-one solution you can use for almost anything. Plus, the milk frother attachment is a lot easier to use than some others. Also, Philips includes a two-year warranty, so you'll have plenty of time to break it in without worrying about replacing it. The mixture of versatility and customization, the 12-step ceramic grinder, the ease of the froth attachment, and the deep discount make this an enticing offer, even if it's still a bit on the expensive side. Plus, this is the same low price we saw during Prime Day back in July. We don't anticipate it lasting long at this price point and don't expect to see it dip this low for some months to come.
TechCrunch
3 minutes ago
- TechCrunch
Google denies AI search features are killing website traffic
Numerous studies indicate that the shift to AI search features and the use of AI chatbots are killing traffic to publishers' sites. But Google on Wednesday denied that's the case, at least in aggregate. Instead, the search giant says that total organic click volume from its search engine to websites has been 'relatively stable' year-over-year and that average click quality has slightly increased. 'This data is in contrast to third-party reports that inaccurately suggest dramatic declines in aggregate traffic — often based on flawed methodologies, isolated examples, or traffic changes that occurred prior to the roll out of AI features in Search,' writes Google VP and Head of Search, Liz Reid, in a new blog post. Though Google hasn't shared any specific data to back up its conclusions, even if we assume Google's claims to be true, this doesn't necessarily mean that AI isn't having an impact. Even Google has to admit this, as Reid acknowledges that 'user trends are shifting traffic to different sites, resulting in decreased traffic to some sites and increased traffic to others.' That word 'some' is doing heavy lifting here, as Google doesn't share data about how many sites are gaining or losing. And while chatbots like ChatGPT have certainly seen traffic increase in recent months, that doesn't mean online publishers aren't suffering. Image Credits:Google Google has been revamping its search engine for years to answer more questions directly on the search results page, and now does so with AI through its 'AI Overviews' that appear at the top of search results. Google also allows users to interact with an AI chatbot for some queries. Yet Google denies that this is significantly reshaping the search landscape. Rather, it points to users shifting their attention to other sites to start their queries. Reid explains, 'People are increasingly seeking out and clicking on sites with forums, videos, podcasts, and posts where they can hear authentic voices and first-hand perspectives.' Reading between the lines, it seems like isn't necessarily people's first stop on the web these days. But that's something we've known for some time. Back in 2022, a Google exec even said that social sites like TikTok and Instagram were eating into Google's core products, like Search and Maps. 'In our studies, something like almost 40% of young people, when they're looking for a place for lunch, they don't go to Google Maps or Search,' said Google SVP Prabhakar Raghavan, who ran the company's Knowledge and Information organization at the time (he is now its Chief Technologist). 'They go to TikTok or Instagram,' he noted. Google has also long been worried that had become people's first stop for online shopping searches, and had become the first stop for researching topics of interest. Over many years, the company has tried to come up with compelling features for both consumers and retailers that would attract more users to Google Shopping. These efforts have included universal shopping carts, local inventory checks, deal finders, shopping from product images on websites, and more. It even made its Shopping listings free for merchants in 2020. Meanwhile, as users complained that Google Search quality was declining, the search giant was seeing so much demand for Reddit that it finally added a 'Reddit' filter to allow users to narrow down results on relevant search queries. (Now that filter simply reads, 'forums.') So perhaps there's some truth in Google's denials — it's not AI that's entirely responsible for killing search. Search was already dying. Close-up of a person's hand holding an iPhone and using Google AI Mode, an experimental mode utilizing artificial intelligence and large language models to process Google search queries, Lafayette, California, March 24, 2025. (Photo by Smith Collection/Gado/Getty Images) Image Credits:Smith Collection/Gado / Getty Images Google's new blog post also attempts to move the goal posts a bit about what it means for websites receiving Google's clicks. Now, instead of counting clicks, it wants publishers to think about click quality. The company says average click quality has increased, and Google is sending 'slightly more quality clicks' to websites than a year ago. (Google explains that a quality click is one where users don't quickly click back — they stay and read.) How much of an increase, though, Google doesn't say. The company only points out that when people click through on an AI response to the source, they're more likely to dive deeper, so those clicks are more valuable. What's more, Google paints AI as an opportunity for web publishers to gain increased exposure, saying that '…with AI Overviews, people are seeing more links on the page than before,' as Reid writes. 'More queries and more links mean more opportunities for websites to surface and get clicked.' But AI, while a growing referral source, isn't yet making up the difference in terms of clicks, reports have shown. One recent study from Similarweb indicates that the number of news searches on the web resulting in zero clicks to news websites has grown from 56% (when Google launched AI Overviews in May 2024) to 69% as of May 2025. Image Credits:Similarweb Google appears to knows this is a trend, too, as it recently launched a product for publishers that helps them monetize their dwindling traffic in other ways that don't rely only on advertising, like micropayments or newsletter sign-ups. The fact that Google is pushing this 'AI is not the end of search traffic!' PR now only makes the situation seem more dire. It's as if Google wants publishers to believe not what their own eyes — and graphs and charts — tell them, but instead take comfort in the fact that Google still sends 'billions of clicks to websites' every day, just as the post claims.
