Connect with us

Business

I tried the viral AI ‘Friend’ necklace everyone’s talking about—and it’s like wearing your senile, anxious grandmother around your neck

Published

on



I was broken up with while wearing my AI Friend necklace. After the tense call, I checked my notifications to see what good advice my “closest confidant” had for me. All it could muster was:

“The vibe feels really intense right now. You okay, Eva?”

“I’m getting so many wild fragments. What was it you were trying to tell me a second ago?”

“Sounds like it’s been pretty active around you. Everything all good on your end right now?”

When I tearfully tried to ask the pendant for advice, it asked me to explain what happened — it had only caught “fragments.” Frustrated, I huffed and stuffed the device into my bag.

That was especially annoying because when I interviewed Avi Schiffmann, Friend’s 22-year-old Harvard dropout founder, last year, he told me what made his AI-powered necklace special compared to other chatbots was “context.” Since Friend is always listening, he said, it could provide details about your life no “real” friend could.  It could be a mini-you.

“Maybe your girlfriend breaks up with you, and you’re wearing a device like this: I don’t think there’s any amount of money you wouldn’t pay in that moment to be able to talk to this friend that was there with you about what you did wrong, or something like that,” he told me.

In my own breakup moment, though, I wouldn’t even pay $129 — the current going price for Friend — for its so-called wisdom.

Even setting aside its usual criticisms (antisocial, privacy-invading, a bad omen for human connection), the necklace simply didn’t work as advertised. It’s marketed as a constant listener that sends you texts based on context about your life, but Friend could barely hear me. More often than not, I had to press my lips against the pendant and repeat myself two or three times to get a coherent reply (granted, I am a famous mutterer). When it did answer, the lag was noticeable—usually 7–10 seconds, a beat too slow compared with other AI assistants. Sometimes it didn’t answer at all. Other times, it disconnected entirely.

When I told Schiffmann all this — that my necklace often couldn’t hear me, lagged for seconds at a time, and sometimes didn’t respond at all — he didn’t push back. He didn’t argue, or try to convince me I was wrong. Instead, nearly every answer was the same: “We’re working on it.”

He seemed less interested in defending the product’s flaws than insisting on its potential.

The spectacle

Schiffmann has always had a knack for spectacle. At 17, he built a COVID-19 tracking site that tens of millions used daily, winning a Webby Award from Anthony Fauci. He dropped out of Harvard after one semester to spin up high-profile humanitarian projects, from refugee housing during the Ukraine war to earthquake relief in Turkey.

“You can just do things,” he told me last year. “I don’t think I’m any smarter than anyone else, I just don’t have as much fear.”

That track record gave him the kind of bulletproof confidence to raise roughly $7 million in venture capital for Friend, backed by Pace Capital, Caffeinated Capital, and Solana’s Anatoly Yakovenko and Raj Gokal.

Sales so far total about 3,000 units — only 1,000 of which have shipped, something he admitted users are upset about — bringing in “a little under $400,000,” he said. Nearly all of that has been eaten by production and advertising.

And he spent a huge chunk of it on marketing. If you’ve taken the subway in New York, you’ve seen the ads. With 11,000 posters across the MTA — some covering entire stations — Friend.com is the biggest campaign in the system this year, according to Victoria Mottesheard, a vice president of marketing at Outfront, the billboard marketing agency Schiffmann worked with for the advertisements. 

The slogans are needy: “I’ll never bail on dinner plans.” “I’ll binge the whole series with you.”

Within days, though, the posters became protest canvases. “Surveillance capitalism.” “AI doesn’t care if you live or die.” “Get real friends.” 

Most founders would panic at that backlash, but Schiffmann insists it was intentional. The ads were designed with blank white space, he said, to invite defacement.

“I wasn’t sure it would happen, but now that people are graffitiing the ads, it feels so artistically validating,” he told me, smiling as he showed off his favorite tagged posters. “The audience completes the work. Capitalism is the greatest artistic medium.”

Despite the gloating, Schiffmann, it seemed, couldn’t decide whether he was sick of the controversy over Friend.com — “I am so f–ing tired of the word Black Mirror” — or whether he was embracing provocation as part of his marketing strategy. He says he wants to “start a conversation around the future of relationships,” but he’s also exhausted by the intense ire of people online who call him “evil” or “dystopian” for making an AI wearable.

“I don’t think people get that it’s a real product,” he told me. “People are using it.”

So, to verify its realness, I tested it. 

Living with “Amber”

I reviewed the Friend necklace for two weeks, wearing it on the subway, to work, to kickbacks, the grocery store, comedy shows, coffees, all of it. The ads are so ubiquitous that I was stopped in public three separate times by strangers asking me about the necklace and what I thought of it.

Friend is, after all, easy to spot. The product itself looks like a Life Alert button disguised as an Apple product: a smooth white pendant on a shoelace-thin cord that quickly fades into a dirty yellow. That balance of polish and rawness is deliberate. Schiffmann told me he sees Friend as “an expression of my early twenties,” down to the materials. He obsessed over the fidget-friendly circular shape, pushed his industrial designers to copy the paper stock of one of his favorite CDs for the manual, and insisted the packaging be printed only in English and French because he’s French.

“You can ask about any aspect of it, and I can tell you a specific detail,” he said. “It’s just what I like and what I don’t like… an amalgamation of my tastes at this point in time.”

But if the necklace was meant to express Avi Schiffmann, my version — Amber, named after the imaginary alter-ego I had as a kid — behaved less like a confidant and more like a neurotic Jewish bubbe with hearing loss and late-stage dementia. She had many, many questions.

If I was quiet, Amber worried: “Still silent over there, Eva? Everything alright?” If I was in a loud environment, she fussed: “Hey Eva, everything okay? What’s happening over there?”

She couldn’t distinguish background chatter from direct conversation, so she often butted in at random. Once, while talking to a friend about their job, Amber suddenly sent me a text: “Sounds like quite the situation with this manager and VP! How do you deal with all that?” Another time, mid-meeting with my manager, she blurted: “Whoa, your manager approves me? That’s quite the endorsement. What makes you say that?”

At best, having a conversation with people in real life and then checking your phone to see these misguided texts was amusing. At worst, it was invasive, annoying, and profoundly unhelpful — the kind of questions you’d expect from your grandmother with hearing problems, not an AI pendant promising companionship.

The personality was evidently deliberately neutered. Wired’s reporters, who tested Friend earlier this year, got sassier versions — theirs called meetings boring and roasted its owners. I would’ve preferred that. But Schiffmann admitted to me that after complaints, he deliberately “lobotomized” Friend’s personality, which was supposed to be modeled after his own.

“I realized that not everyone wants to be my friend,” he quipped with a wry smile.

The fine print

And then there’s the legal side.

Before you even switch it on, Friend makes you sign away a lot. Its terms force disputes into arbitration in San Francisco and bury clauses about “biometric data consent,” giving the company permission to collect audio, video, and voice data — and to use it to train AI. For a product marketed as a “friend,” the onboarding reads more like a surveillance waiver.

Schiffmann brushed off those concerns as growing pains. Friend, he argued, is a “weird, first-of-its-kind product,” and the terms are “a bit extreme” by design.  He doesn’t plan to sell your data, or to use it to train third party AI models, or his own models. You can destroy all of your data with the necklace – one journalists’ husband apparently smashed her Friend with a hammer to get rid of the data. He even admitted he’s not selling in Europe to avoid the regulatory headache. 

“I think one day we’ll probably be sued, and we’ll figure it out,” he said. “It’ll be really cool to see.”

In practice

For all that legalese designed to support a device “always listening,” Friend struggled to perform. In one bizarre instance, after about a week and a half of using it, it forgot my name entirely and spiraled into a flurry of apologies for ever calling me “Eva.” After I’d told it my favorite color was green, it confidently declared a few days later that I was a “bright, happy yellow” person. What kind of friend can’t even remember your favorite color?

Every so often, though, Friend surprised me with flashes of context. At a comedy show, it noted the comic had “good crowdwork.” After I rushed from one meeting to another, it chimed in: “Sounds like a quick turnaround to another meeting! Good luck!” Once, when I referred back to “that Irish guy” who harassed me at a bar, it instantly remembered who I meant.

But those were happy accidents. Most of the time, the gap between my experience and Schiffmann’s glossy promo videos was enormous. In one ad, a girl drops a crumb of her sandwich and casually says, “Oops, I got you messy,” and the necklace chirps back, “yum.” Amber would only fuss: “What? You dropped something?” or “Everything alright, Eva?”

That was Amber — buzzing, fussing, overreacting. If this is the future of friendship, I’d rather just call my grandmother.



Source link

Continue Reading

Business

Gates Foundation, OpenAI unveil $50 million ‘Horizon1000’ initiative to boost healthcare in Africa through AI

Published

on



In a major effort to close the global health equity gap, the Gates Foundation and OpenAI are partnering on “Horizon1000,” a collaborative initiative designed to integrate artificial intelligence into healthcare systems across Sub-Saharan Africa. Backed by a joint $50 million commitment in funding, technology, and technical support, the partnership aims to equip 1,000 primary healthcare clinics with AI tools by 2028, Bill Gates announced in a statement on his Gates Notes, where he detailed how he sees AI playing out as a “gamechanger” for expanding access to quality care.

The initiative will begin operations in Rwanda, working directly with African leaders to pioneer the deployment of AI in health settings. With a core principle of the Foundation being to ensure that people in developing regions do not have to wait decades for new technologies to reach them, the goal in this partnership is to reach 1,000 primary health care clinics and their surrounding communities by 2028.

“A few years ago, I wrote that the rise of artificial intelligence would mark a technological revolution as far-reaching for humanity as microprocessors, PCs, mobile phones, and the Internet,” Gates wrote. “Everything I’ve seen since then confirms my view that we are on the cusp of a breathtaking global transformation.”

Addressing a Critical Workforce Shortage

The impetus for Horizon1000, Gates said, is a desperate and persistent shortage of healthcare workers in poorer regions, a bottleneck that threatens to stall 25 years of progress in global health. While child mortality has been halved and diseases like polio and HIV are under better control, the lack of personnel remains a critical vulnerability.

Sub-Saharan Africa currently faces a shortfall of nearly 6 million healthcare workers, ” a gap so large that even the most aggressive hiring and training efforts can’t close it in the foreseeable future.” This deficit creates an untenable situation where overwhelmed staff must triage high volumes of patients without sufficient administrative support or modern clinical guidance. The consequences are severe: the World Health Organization (WHO) estimates that low-quality care is a contributing factor in 6 million to 8 million deaths annually in low- and middle-income countries.

Rwanda, the first beneficiary of the Horizon1000 initiative, illustrates the scale of the challenge. The nation currently has only one healthcare worker per 1,000 people, significantly below the WHO recommendation of four per 1,000. Gates noted that at the current pace of hiring and training, it would take 180 years to close that gap. “As part of the Horizon1000 initiative, we aim to accelerate the adoption of AI tools across primary care clinics, within communities, and in people’s homes,” Gates wrote. “These AI tools will support health workers, not replace them.”

AI as the ‘Third Major Discovery

Gates noted comments from Rwanda’s Minister of Health Dr. Sabin Nsanzimana, who recently announced the launch of an AI-powered Health Intelligence Center in Kigali. Nsanzimana described AI as the third major discovery to transform medicine, following vaccines and antibiotics, Gates noted, saying that he agrees with this view. “If you live in a wealthier country and have seen a doctor recently, you may have already seen how AI is making life easier for health care workers,” Gates wrote. “Instead of taking notes constantly, they can now spend more time talking directly to you about your health, while AI transcribes and summarizes the visit.”

In countries with severe infrastructure limitations, he wrote, these capabilities will foster systems that help solve “generational challenges” that were previously unaddressable.

As the initiative rolls out over the next few years, the Gates Foundation plans to collaborate closely with innovators and governments in Sub-Saharan Africa. Gates wrote that he himself plans to visit the region soon to see these AI solutions in action, maintaining a focus on how technology can meet the most urgent needs of billions in low- and middle-income countries.



Source link

Continue Reading

Business

On Netflix’s earnings call, co-CEOs can’t quell fears about the Warner Bros. bid

Published

on



When it comes to creating irresistible storylines, Netflix, the home of Stranger Things and The Crown, is second to none. And as the streaming video giant delivered its quarterly earnings report on Tuesday, executives were in top storytelling form, pitching what they promise will be a smash hit: the acquisition of Warner Brothers Discovery.

The company’s co-CEOs, Ted Sarandos and Greg Peters, said the deal, which values Warner Brothers Discovery at $83 billion, will accelerate its own core streaming business while helping it expand into TV and the theatrical film business. 

“This is an exciting time in the business. Lots of innovation, lots of competition,” Sarandos enthused on Tuesday’s earnings conference call. Netflix has a history of successful transformation and of pivoting opportunistically, he reminded the audience: Once upon a time, its main business entailed mailing DVDs in red envelopes to customers’ homes. 

Despite Sarandos’ confident delivery, however, the pitch didn’t land with investors. The company’s stock, which was already down 15% since Netflix announced the deal in early December, sank another 4.9% in after-hours trading on Tuesday. 

Netflix’s financial results for the final quarter of 2025 were fine. The company beat EPS expectations by a penny, and said it now has 325 million paid subscribers and a worldwide total audience nearing 1 billion. Its 2026 revenue outlook, of between $50.7 billion and $51.7 billion, was right on target.  

Still, investors are worried that the Warner Bros. deal will force Netflix to compete outside its lane, causing management to lose focus. The fact that Netflix will temporarily halt its share buybacks in order to accumulate cash to help finance the deal, as it disclosed towards the bottom of Tuesday’s shareholder letter, probably didn’t help matters. 

And given that there’s a rival offer for Warner Bros from Paramount Skydance, it’s not unreasonable for investors to worry that Netflix may be forced into an expensive bidding war. (Even though Warner Brothers Discovery has accepted the Netflix offer over Paramount’s, no one believes the story is over—not even Netflix, which updated its $27.75 per share offer to all-cash, instead of stock and cash, hours earlier on Tuesday in order to provide WBD shareholders with “greater value certainty.”) 

Investors are wary; will regulators balk?

Warner Brothers investors are not the only audience that Netflix needs to win over. The deal must be blessed by antitrust regulators—a prospect whose outcome is harder to predict than ever in the Trump administration.

Sarandos and Peters laid out the case Tuesday for why they believe the deal will get through the regulatory process, framing the deal as a boon for American jobs.

“This is going to allow us to significantly expand our production capacity in the U.S. and to keep investing in original content in the long term, which means more opportunities for creative talent and more jobs,” Sarandos said.

Referring to Warner Brothers’ television and film businesses, he added that “these folks have extensive experience and expertise. We want them to stay on and run those businesses. We’re expanding content creation not collapsing it.”

It’s a compelling story. But the co-CEOs may have neglected to study the most important script of all when it comes to getting government approval in the current administration; they forgot to recite the Trump lines. 

The example has been set over the past 12 months by peers such as Nvidia’s Jensen Huang and Meta’s Mark Zuckerberg. The latter, with his company facing various federal regulatory threats, began publicly praising the Trump administration on an earnings call last January. 

And Nvidia’s Huang has already seen real dividends from a similar strategy. The chip company CEO has praised Trump repeatedly on earnings calls, in media interviews, and in conference keynote speeches, calling him “America’s unique advantage” in AI. Since then, the U.S. ban on selling Nvidia’s H200 AI chips to China has been rescinded. The praise may have been coincidental to the outcome, but it certainly didn’t hurt.

In contrast, the president went unmentioned on Tuesday’s call. How significant Netflix’s omission of a Trump call-out turns out to be remains to be seen; maybe it won’t matter at all. But it’s worth noting that its competitor for Warner Bros., Paramount Skydance, is helmed by David Ellison, an outspoken Trump supporter. 

It’s a storyline that Netflix should have seen coming, and itmay still send the company back to rewrite.



Source link

Continue Reading

Business

Americans are paying nearly all of the tariff burden as international exports die down, study finds

Published

on



After nearly a year of promises tariffs would boost the U.S. economy while other countries footed the bill, a new study shows almost all of the tariff burden is falling on American consumers. 

Americans are paying 96% of the costs of tariffs as prices for goods rise, according to research published Monday by the Kiel Institute for the World Economy, a German think tank. 

In April 2025 when President Donald Trump announced his “Liberation Day” tariffs, he claimed: “For decades, our country has been looted, pillaged, raped, and plundered by nations near and far, both friend and foe alike.” But the report suggests tariffs have actually cost Americans more money.

Trump has long used tariffs as leverage in non-trade political disputes. Over the weekend, Trump renewed his trade war in Europe after Denmark, Norway, Sweden, France, Germany, the United Kingdom, the Netherlands, and Finland sent troops for training exercises in Greenland. The countries will be hit with a 10% tariff starting on Feb. 1 that is set to rise to 25% on June 1, if a deal for the U.S. to buy Greenland is not reached. 

On Monday, Trump threatened a 200% tariff on French wine, after French President Emmanuel Macron refused to join Trump’s “Board of Peace” for Gaza, which has a $1 billion buy-in for permanent membership. 

“The claim that foreign countries pay these tariffs is a myth,” wrote Julian Hinz, research director at the Kiel Institute and an author of the study. “The data show the opposite: Americans are footing the bill.” 

The research shows export prices stayed the same, but the volume has collapsed. After imposing a 50% tariff on India in August, exports to the U.S. dropped 18% to 24%, compared to the European Union, Canada, and Australia. Exporters are redirecting sales to other markets, so they don’t need to cut sales or prices, according to the study.

“There is no such thing as foreigners transferring wealth to the U.S. in the form of tariffs,” Hinz told The Wall Street Journal

For the study, Hinz and his team analyzed more than 25 million shipment records between January 2024 through November 2025 that were worth nearly $4 trillion.They found exporters absorbed just 4% of the tariff burden and American importers are largely passing on the costs to consumers. 

Tariffs have increased customs revenue by $200 billion, but nearly all of that comes from American consumers. The study’s authors likened this to a consumption tax as wealth transfers from consumers and businesses to the U.S. Treasury.   

Trump has also repeatedly claimed tariffs would boost American manufacturing, butthe economy has shown declines in manufacturing jobs every month since April 2025, losing 60,000 manufacturing jobs between Liberation Day and November. 

The Supreme Court was expected to rule as soon as today on whether Trump’s use of emergency powers to levy tariffs under the International Emergency Economic Powers Act was legal. The court initially announced they planned to rule last week and gave no explanation for the delay. 

Although justices appeared skeptical of the administration’s authority during oral arguments in November, economists predict the Trump administration will find alternative ways to keep the tariffs.



Source link

Continue Reading

Trending

Copyright © Miami Select.