Federal immigration enforcement officers operating in New York will soon be met by legal observers in purple vests.
New York Attorney General Letitia James announced on February 3 that her office is launching an initiative called the Legal Observation Project. Trained legal observers from her officeincluding lawyers and other state employeeswill serve as “neutral witnesses” of the federal government’s immigration enforcement activity on the ground in the state, James’s office said.
By observing and recording the actions of agents from Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) or other federal agencies, which the public has a right to do, the observers will provide the attorney general’s office with information that could one day be used in future legal action if any laws are broken. By having a uniform, they are standing out and identifying themselves.
“We have seen in Minnesota how quickly and tragically federal operations can escalate in the absence of transparency and accountability,” James said in a statement. “My office is launching the Legal Observation Project to examine federal enforcement activity in New York and whether it remains within the bounds of the law.”
James’s office says specifically that observers from the initiative won’t interfere with enforcement activity and that their job is to merely document federal conduct safely and legally. Her office did not respond to a request for comment.
The purple vests these observers wear will bear the insignia of the attorney generals office. They’re the latest example of state-level officials turning to colored vests amid President Donald Trump’s escalation of federal immigration enforcement. In Minneapolis, the Minnesota National Guard last month began wearing yellow safety vests so people could tell them apart from federal agents.
In the absence of a single dress code, mostly masked federal officers from multiple agencies have worn a range of clothing, from jeans to fatigues and tactical vests in the Minneapolis area. The yellow vests are bright signifiers “to distinguish our members from those of other agencies, due to similar uniforms being worn,” as Minnesota National Guard spokeswoman Army Major Andrea Tsuchiya put it. A safety vest signals that the wearer wants to stand out and actually be recognized.
In New York, the vests color “will aid in the ability of the trained legal observers to stand out in a crowd of bystanders and federal agents,” University of Minnesota College of Design faculty lecturer Kathryn Reiley tells Fast Company. “The federal agents tend to wear uniforms that are black, navy blue, or army green. The purple vests will produce the intended result of making the trained legal observers identifiable as a separate group of government employees that are not federal agents.”
The ramping up of New York’s Legal Observation Project comes as the Trump administration is scaling down its enforcement efforts in Minnesota. On February 4, the administration said its withdrawing 700 officers immediately, about a 25% reduction.
The reduction in force in Minnesota only came following public pressure made possible thanks to citizen footage that showed the reality on the ground in Minneapolis and galvanized the public against ICE. A 56% majority of U.S. adults have little or no confidence in the agency, according to the latest American Values Survey released this week by the nonpartisan research nonprofit Public Religion Research Institute, including 85% of Democrats, nearly two-thirds of independents, and more than one in five Republicans.
Its easy to be charmed by the first delivery robot you see. I was driving with my kids in our Chicago neighborhood when I spotted one out the window last year. It was a cheerful pink color, with an orange flag fluttering at about eye level and four black-and-white wheels. It looked almost like an overgrown toy.
When I told the kids that it was labeled Coco, they started waving and giggling as it crossed the street. Over the months that followed, spotting Cocos rolling down the sidewalk became one of our favorite games.
Then, last fall, another type of delivery robot appeared. This one was green and white, with hardier all-terrain wheels and slow-blinking LED eyes. My kids and I tried to read the name printed on its side as it idled across the street: Peggy? Polly?
I later learned that the green newcomer was a Coco competitor made by a company called Serve Robotics. Every Serve robot is christened with its own individual moniker.
At first, my interactions with the robots were mostly polite. One slowed to a stop while my dog cocked his head and sniffed curiously. Another waited patiently while we crossed Lincoln Avenue on our daily walk home from school, giving my stroller right of way on the ramp at the curb.
In principle, they seemed like an improvement over double-parked delivery drivers and careening e-bikes.
But some of my neighbors were having more negative experiences.
Josh Robertson, who lives around the corner from me with his wife and two young children, was unnerved enough by a standoff with a robot that he decided to start a petition: No Sidewalk Bots. Thus far, more than 3,300 people have signed, with nearly one-third of those submitting an incident report.
Through the incident field, Robertson has heard about feet being run overa Serve robot weighs 220 pounds and can carry 15 gallonsnear-collisions, unwelcome noise, blocked entryways, and more. In one case, a man required stitches around his eye after stumbling into a robots visibility flag.
Sidewalks are for people, Robertson says. Vehicles, in general, should be in the streets.
Robertsons petition, the first so far in the cities where Coco and Serve operate, has revealed a groundswell of frustration over the strategically cute autonomous vehicles.
In conversations with the CEOs of Coco and Serve, I got a close-up look at the arguments in favor of delivery robots, which the companies say are better suited to short-distance deliveries than 2-ton cars. If they have their way, whats happening where I live will soon be playing out across dozens of cities as these well-capitalized startups seek to deploy thousands of their sidewalk bots.
But in a matter of months, my neighborhoods robots have arguably gone from novelty to nuisance. Silicon Valley startups are good at launching bright ideas, but bad at estimating their collateral damage.
Are our sidewalks destined to be their next victim?
From cute to concern
In early December, around the same time the petition started to get local media coverage and gain momentum, I found myself sympathizing for the first time with the petitioners point of view.
I was running an errand on a sidewalk that was crusted on one side with a thick layer of dirty snow when I noticed a Serve robot named Shima inching forward in my direction. It stopped as I approached, per Serves protocols. But in order to pass it by without stepping onto the snow, I had to navigate an inches-wide lane of space. If I had been pushing a wagon or a stroller, I wouldnt have fit.
The tree-lined sidewalks in my neighborhood are among the reasons I love living here. Outside my front door, near DePaul University, there is a constant stream of activity: bedraggled undergrads, eager dogs, bundled babies, dedicated runners. Within a 10-minute walking radius, I can find coffee, ice cream, playgrounds, vintage shopping, two Michelin-starred restaurants, my doctor, and my dentist.
I began to worry that delivery robots would change Lincoln Parks sidewalks for the worse.
Why delivery robots are suddenly everywhere
In the U.S., startups have been experimenting with delivery robots for close to a decade. Perhaps not surprisingly, some of the first were deployed in San Francisco. By 2017, the Bay Area city had become a hotbed for robot innovationand residents frustration. In December of that year, city lawmakers passed an unusually restrictive policy limiting companies to deploying just three robots and requiring that a human chaperone accompany them.
But the idea of sidewalk-based robots remained attractive to both entrepreneurs and delivery companies. Zach Rash and Brad Squicciarini founded Coco in 2020; as UCLA undergrads, they had built research robots to assess transportation and accessibility issues on campus. The following year, Uber spun Serve Robotics out of Postmates (which it had acquired for $2.65 billion to bolster its Uber Eats business), installing Ali Kashani, who had led Postmates X, as CEO.
The delivery economy is booming, with three in four restaurant orders now eaten outside of the restaurant itself. For eateries and the platforms that enable their deliveries, robots offer a way around the labor costs and unpredictability associated with drivers. In an investor presentation from last year, Serve projected that its cost of delivery, with increased scale and autonomy, could be just $1 per trip.
Mass adoption of delivery robots is now possible because of recent technology advancements, says Rash, Cocos CEO, as he ticks off the list. We have Nvidia compute on the vehicles thats designed for robotics. Battery capacity has gotten a lot better, so you can drive multiple days without needing to recharge. Then, we have really robust supply chains around wheels, motors, motor controllersa lot of the basic stuff you need to drive these things.
Put it all together, and Coco aims to operate a global fleet of 10,000-plus vehicles in select U.S. cities and overseas locations like Helsinki. Were delivering hot food, so [the robot] has to be able to get from point A to point B incredibly reliably every single time while maintaining a really low cost, Rash says.
Though Coco, like Serve, is only as wide as the shoulder width of an average adult, it can tote four grocery bags or even eight large pizzas. It can fit all the types of things people need delivered, says Rash, but its incredibly compact, its safe, its energy efficient, and I think its the best way to shuttle stuff around our cities.
For now, that stuff consists almost entirely of restaurant deliveries. Both Coco and Serve have partnerships with Uber Eats and DoorDash.
But the vision for the two startups extends far beyond burgers and burritos. Someday our kids are going to look back and think how weird it was that a person had to be attached to every package that comes to our front door every day, says Serves Kashani, who believes delivery robots true transformative potential lies in last-mile delivery.
I ordered a pair of climbing shoes for my daughter, and it was the wrong size, he says. It took two days to come, and then I had to deal with the reverse logistics of shipping i back and waiting for the next pair. Well, instead of ordering from Amazon, I could have ordered from a local store. [A delivery robot] could have shown up with two, three sizes. The robot could have waited while we tried the shoes and taken back the ones that didnt fit. So you have all these new types of things that people can do that werent possible before because last-mile was just too inefficient and expensive.
Serve started 2025 with roughly 100 robots. By December, it had built 2,000. Thats a point where it makes sense for the Walmarts of the world to want to integrate because now theres a fleet they can access, Kashani says, noting that Serves robots can accommodate more than 80% of Walmarts SKUs.
How Coco and Serve approach safety
Coco and Serve, along with competitors like Starship (which raised a $50 million Series C last October and announced at the time it planned to have 12,000 robots by 2027), are all, in a sense, bets on autonomy.
Behind the scenes, human operators are training the robots and stepping in to resolve problems. But the success of the model ultimately hinges on how well the vehicles learn to navigate neighborhoods on their own.
Robot companies often point out that unlike self-driving cars, bots can usually just hit the brakes to de-escalate an encounter or avoid a collision.
Its usually appropriate to stop, right? A car cant just stop; you might cause an accident, says Rash, acknowledging, though, that the sidewalk is a much less structured environment with a lot more chaos.
If my robot stops in the middle of a sidewalk, nothing bad happens, echoes Kashani, adding that Serve robots have thousands of times less kinetic energy than a car. That also gives us some affordances. Because we are moving more slowly, we have more time to think. So we dont need as expensive of sensors, for example, or as many computers to achieve the same thing [as a self-driving car].
But despite those advantages, combined with years of training data, robots are still making mistakes. Social media abounds with robot bloopersand worse. In one recent example, a high-speed passenger train in Miami mowed down a delivery robot stopped at a crossing on the tracks. Stopping, in that case, was fatal to the robot.
In my own experience, one of the challenges pedestrians encounter with robots is simply their unpredictability. Cocos robots tend to drive more smoothly, perhaps a result of the startups choice to have human pilots more involved.
“Coco has been operating in Chicago for over a year with strong community support and without any major incidents or safety concerns,” Rash says. “Safety and community partnership are our top priorities.”
Serves robots, in contrast, are more reliant on lidar and AI; their stilted driving often reminds me of the remote-controlled toy car my son used to drive as a toddler.
A Serve spokesperson tells Fast Company: We are working closely with city officials and local stakeholders to ensure responsible deployments, and we are committed to being a positive, safe, and respectful presence in the communities we serve.
Knowing that the robot is designed to cede to pedestrians is little comfort when its jerking back and forth right in front of you.
Whats next for Chicago
Robot deployment in Chicago is still, technically, part of a pilot program. Two city agencies, the Chicago Department of Business Affairs and Consumer Protection and the Chicago Department of Transportation, are jointly involved in licensing and assessment. If the City Council doesnt renew the pilot, Coco and Serves licenses will expire in spring 2027. This week, one city alderman began soliciting feedback from his constituents as Coco and Serve seek to expand into other Chicago neighborhoods.
Robertson, who created the anti-bots petition, is calling for an immediate halt to the program. The delivery robots promised benefits are appealing, he acknowledges, from reduced emissions to lower congestion. But I think we should be skeptical [of those claims] and make sure were taking a data-driven approach, he says. What if robot trips replace bike trips instead of car trips? Or what if opening our sidewalks to these little vehicles leaves the total number of trips in the street unchanged? We need data. Then Chicagoans will be able to decide for ourselves if thats how we want to tackle emissions and street congestion.
Robertson also raises the problem of enshittification, a term coined by author and journalist Cory Doctorow in 2022 to describe the perhaps inevitable degradation of online platforms over time as they seek to wring greater profits from their users. Eventually, these robot companies, even if they do save consumers a buck or two right now on delivery fees, theyve got to make a return for their investors, people like Sam Altman, he says. (OpenAI cofounder and CEO Altman has invested in multiple rounds of Cocos funding; last spring, OpenAI and Coco announced a partnership that will make use of Cocos real-world data.)
Already, ads supplement Serves revenue, turning some robots into rolling billboards and inserting the commercial into the public way.
Last month in Chicago was bitterly cold and snowy, the kind of weather that drains robot batteries and presents obstacles to even all-terrain robot wheels. After growing accustomed to seeing Coco and Serve on a daily basis, I found myself wondering whether they were even attempting to brave the frigid January sidewalks.
But I cant say that I missed them.
Burnout is best understood as a work-related psychological syndrome arising from sustained emotional and interpersonal strain. It has three core components: emotional exhaustion, characterized by chronic affective depletion; depersonalization, in which work becomes alienating and psychologically distancing rather than engaging; and reduced professional efficacy, marked by declining confidence, poorer self-appraisals, and a loss of self-worth.
Importantly, burnout is not the same as stress. Rather, it is a pattern of responses to work stressors, and can also be distinguished from depression by its work-specific context. Burnout is best assessed via self-report questionnaires (psychometrics), and the below statements provide a simple checklist for evaluating its three components.
{"blockType":"mv-promo-block","data":{"imageDesktopUrl":"https:\/\/images.fastcompany.com\/image\/upload\/f_webp,q_auto,c_fit\/wp-cms-2\/2025\/10\/tcp-photo-syndey-16X9.jpg","imageMobileUrl":"https:\/\/images.fastcompany.com\/image\/upload\/f_webp,q_auto,c_fit\/wp-cms-2\/2025\/10\/tcp-photo-syndey-1x1-2.jpg","eyebrow":"","headline":"Get more insights from Tomas Chamorro-Premuzic","dek":"Dr. Tomas Chamorro-Premuzic is a professor of organizational psychology at UCL and Columbia University, and the co-founder of DeeperSignals. He has authored 15 books and over 250 scientific articles on the psychology of talent, leadership, AI, and entrepreneurship. ","subhed":"","description":"","ctaText":"Learn More","ctaUrl":"https:\/\/drtomas.com\/intro\/","theme":{"bg":"#2b2d30","text":"#ffffff","eyebrow":"#9aa2aa","subhed":"#ffffff","buttonBg":"#3b3f46","buttonHoverBg":"#3b3f46","buttonText":"#ffffff"},"imageDesktopId":91424798,"imageMobileId":91424800,"shareable":false,"slug":""}}
1. Emotional exhaustion (energy depletion)
I feel emotionally drained by my work.
By the end of the workday, I feel used up or wiped out.
I wake up feeling tired at the thought of another day at work.
I feel I have nothing left to give emotionally at work.
2. Depersonalization (psychological distancing and cynicism)
I have become more cynical or negative about my job.
I feel detached or emotionally distant from my work.
I am less interested in what my job means or contributes.
I find myself being more irritable, blunt, or indifferent with colleagues or clients.
3. Reduced professional efficacy (poor self-evaluation and self-perceived impact)
I feel that I am not accomplishing worthwhile things at work.
I doubt my effectiveness or competence more than I used to.
I feel less confident in my ability to handle my job well.
Even when I work hard, it feels like it does not make much difference.
A workplace epidemic
As with most modern workplace malaise, precise prevalence figures are elusive. Yet multiple surveys show burnout is widespread in the industrialized world (where working conditions are actually better). According to a recent Gallup study, about 48% of employees globally report feeling burned out at work, and three-quarters say they experience burnout at least occasionally.
Regional data paints a similar picture. Surveys across Southeast Asia find that 62.9% of workers report high or very high burnout, and U.S. workforce research shows that roughly 31% of employees feel job-related stress often or always, a common precursor to burnout. Younger workers and those with high-demand roles typically report even higher rates, with some employer studies suggesting more than 80% of workers have experienced symptoms such as exhaustion or cognitive strain.
Overlapping forces
Burnout, like most behavioral outcomes, reflects the interplay of internal and external forces. Individual differences in personality and resilience shape vulnerability, while job design, organizational culture, and leadership determine exposure. The same role can exhaust one employee and leave another largely unscathednot because the pressures differ, but because their capacity to absorb and interpret them does.
So, for instance, job control, or the degree to which individuals experience control over their jobs, is a consistent negative predictor of burnout: The less control you feel you have over your job and career, the more at risk of burnout you are. In contrast, when people are given autonomy and resources to perform their jobs, they will experience a sense of control and agency, which in turn increases employee engagement and motivation, and decreases exhaustion and depersonalization.
Much like the difference between driving a car and being a passenger stuck in the back seat, having control makes even demanding journeys more tolerable. It increases motivation and engagement while reducing the emotional fatigue and cynicism that sit at the core of burnout.
Personality as predictor
But no matter how well jobs are designed, individual differences matter a great deal. Most notably, personality is a remarkably consistent predictor of burnout, with lower emotional stability (or higher neuroticism) standing out as a particularly strong risk factorincreasing vulnerability while eroding resilience. Meta-analyses evidence suggests that a substantial share of the variance in burnout symptoms can be traced back to personality, which in turn helps explain downstream outcomes such as job performance, absenteeism, and turnover.
The implication is not that burnout is a personal failing or that organizations should select only the psychologically bulletproof. Rather, it is that prevention and support efforts should be unevenly distributed. Some employees are naturally more resilient and will weather demanding environments with little lasting cost. Others, equally capable and motivated, will require greater support, flexibility, and early intervention to avoid being pushed beyond their limits.
Treating everyone the same may feel fair, but it is rarely effective. In practice, this means paying closer attention to those most at risk and designing support systems that recognize differences in resilience, rather than assuming that the same pressures will be absorbed equally by all.
Situational factors
To be sure, some features of work increase the risk of burnout for almost anyone, helping to explain the high prevalence figures reported earlier. These risk factors are, for the most part, intuitive. Chief among them is workload. When demands consistently exceed the capacity of individuals or teams, energy is depleted faster than it can be restored, making recovery impossible. Burnout, in this sense, is less a sudden collapse than a slow failure to recharge
Workload problems are not limited to quantity. A mismatch can also arise from the nature of the work itself. Even moderate demands become draining when people lack the skills, inclination, or temperament required to meet them. Emotional labor is especially costly: Roles that require employees to display feelings they do not genuinely experience (perpetual enthusiasm, calm, or empathy on demand) create a form of psychological friction that accelerates exhaustion. Unsurprisingly, workload mismatches are most strongly linked to the exhaustion component of burnout, the first and most common stage of the syndrome.
Another powerful driver of burnout is perceived fairness. A serious mismatch between individuals and their work arises when people feel they are treated unjustly. Fairness signals respect and affirms self-worth; its absence does the opposite. Perceptions of unfairness emerge in many familiar forms: inequities in workload or pay, favoritism in promotions, opaque performance evaluations, or grievance processes that deny employees a genuine voice.
Such experiences are not merely irritating but emotionally corrosive. They drain energy, erode trust, and weaken the sense of mutual obligation that underpins healthy workplaces. Over time, persistent unfairness accelerates burnout by intensifying emotional exhaustion and fostering cynicism, as individuals disengage not because the work itself is unmanageable, but because the system governing it feels arbitrary or rigged.
Likewise, burnout is more likely to take hold when a sense of community at work erodes. People function best when they feel socially connected to colleagues they respect and trust, and when everyday interactions allow for shared recognition, support, and even humor. Such connections do more than provide emotional comfort; they reinforce a sense of belonging and shared purpose.
By contrast, work environments that are isolating, transactional, or impersonal deprive employees of an important psychological buffer against stress. Most damaging of all is chronic, unresolved conflict. Persistent tension with colleagues or managers generates ongoing frustration and hostility, undermines trust, and steadily reduces the availability of social support. Over time, the workplace ceases to feel like a community and becomes merely a site of strain, accelerating the path to burnout.
The role of engagement
A final and often overlooked point concerns the relationship between engagement and burnout. Intuitively, the two are negatively related, but empirical evidence suggests the connection is far stronger than commonly assumed. Meta-analytic findings indicate that the overlap is so substantial that engagement and burnout may best be understood as opposite ends of the same underlying continuum rather than as distinct constructs.
Across studies, the average true correlation between burnout and engagement dimensions rises to nearly .80, with burnout explaining well over half of the variance in core engagement components such as absorption, dedication, and vigor. The broader pattern of correlates is almost identical, with vector correlations approaching .90, implying that what predicts burnout largely predicts disengagement in reverse.
Complicating matters further, longitudinal evidence suggests burnout may also reshape personality over time: Higher burnout predicts subsequent declines in extroversion, challenging the assumption that more outgoing individuals are simply less vulnerable.
Finally, job control is more strongly associated with cynicism and diminished efficacy than with exhaustion, a finding with important implications for practice. Given how frequently organizations track engagement, these measures may offer an early and scalable way to detect emerging burnout risks at both group and individual levels, often even before exhaustion becomes visible.
Taken together, the evidence suggests that burnout is neither a passing fad nor a purely individual affliction, but a predictable outcome of how modern work is designed, managed, and experienced. It emerges where chronic demands overwhelm recovery; where control, fairness, and community erode; and where individual vulnerabilities go unrecognized or unsupported. Because burnout closely mirrors disengagementoften preceding visible declines in performance or well-beingit can be detected earlier than many organizations assume, especially through careful attention to engagement data.
Ultimately, preventing burnout is less about eliminating pressure than about restoring balancebetween demands and resources, effort and reward, autonomy and accountability, and uniform policies and differentiated support. Organizations that understand this are not just protecting their people; they are safeguarding their capacity to perform.
{"blockType":"mv-promo-block","data":{"imageDesktopUrl":"https:\/\/images.fastcompany.com\/image\/upload\/f_webp,q_auto,c_fit\/wp-cms-2\/2025\/10\/tcp-photo-syndey-16X9.jpg","imageMobileUrl":"https:\/\/images.fastcompany.com\/image\/upload\/f_webp,q_auto,c_fit\/wp-cms-2\/2025\/10\/tcp-photo-syndey-1x1-2.jpg","eyebrow":"","headline":"Get more insights from Tomas Chamorro-Premuzic","dek":"Dr. Tomas Chamorro-Premuzic is a professor of organizational psychology at UCL and Columbia University, and the co-founder of DeeperSignals. He has authored 15 books and over 250 scientific articles on the psychology of talent, leadership, AI, and entrepreneurship. ","subhed":"","description":"","ctaText":"Learn More","ctaUrl":"https:\/\/drtomas.com\/intro\/","theme":{"bg":"#2b2d30","text":"#ffffff","eyebrow":"#9aa2aa","subhed":"#ffffff","buttonBg":"#3b3f46","buttonHoverBg":"#3b3f46","buttonText":"#ffffff"},"imageDesktopId":91424798,"imageMobileId":91424800,"shareable":false,"slug":""}}
One of the things that I love about working for myself is that I dont need to ask anyones permission before making a decision. If I want to make a change, I go for it, on whatever timeline makes sense for me.
But the freedom of solopreneurship can be a double-edged sword. Since you dont need approval from other people, nothing is stopping you from chasing every shiny tool, course, or strategy that promises to solve your problems.
The ability to say no to distractions is an underrated skill for solopreneurs. Theres a difference between making strategic decisions and letting yourself be pulled in a million directions. You need to master the former and resist the latter.
{"blockType":"mv-promo-block","data":{"imageDesktopUrl":"https:\/\/images.fastcompany.com\/image\/upload\/f_webp,q_auto,c_fit\/wp-cms-2\/2025\/11\/work-better-1.png","imageMobileUrl":"https:\/\/images.fastcompany.com\/image\/upload\/f_webp,q_auto,c_fit\/wp-cms-2\/2025\/11\/work-better-mobile-1.png","eyebrow":"","headline":"\u003Cstrong\u003ESubscribe to Work Better\u003C\/strong\u003E","dek":"Thoughts on the future of work, career pivots, and why work shouldn\u0027t suck, by Anna Burgess Yang. To learn more, visit \u003Ca href=\u0022https:\/\/www.workbetter.media\/\u0022\u003Eworkbetter.media\u003C\/a\u003E.","subhed":"","description":"","ctaText":"SIGN UP","ctaUrl":"https:\/\/www.workbetter.media","theme":{"bg":"#f5f5f5","text":"#000000","eyebrow":"#9aa2aa","subhed":"#ffffff","buttonBg":"#000000","buttonHoverBg":"#3b3f46","buttonText":"#ffffff"},"imageDesktopId":91457605,"imageMobileId":91457608,"shareable":false,"slug":""}}
Questions to ask yourself when evaluating something new
Before jumping on something new, run it through a quick filter. Ask yourself:
What specific problem does this solve? (If you can’t name it, it’s probably a distraction.)
Is this solving a problem I actually have right now?
If I have this problem right now, is it urgent? Or merely annoying?
What’s the cost of looking into this more? (Consider the time to learn something new, the time away from existing work, and the potential to derail other plans you may have.)
Most shiny objects appeal to problems we think we have, not problems we’re actually facing. Or they dont address an urgent need, and it makes more sense to look into them later.
If you ask yourself these questions, the answers can prevent you from hopping on the latest bandwagon when the shiny object doesnt actually make sense for your business.
Im guilty of not always taking the time to stop and think. I vibe-coded myself a new website the other weekend. Did it solve a problem? Yes. Was it necessary at that exact moment in time? No. I put other things aside to tinker with the website. In hindsight, it wouldnt have passed the urgency question, and I should have stayed focused on other projects.
Tactics to stay focused (when everything looks interesting!)
As a solopreneur, you have to create your own guardrails. You don’t have a boss or a team to push back when you want to overhaul your entire tech stack or change your business model.
If you follow a few constraints, you can stay focused.
Set boundaries for yourself. Try a “no new tools” or “no new strategies” rule for a specific period of time (like 90 days) unless something is truly broken. This prevents you from making snap decisions.
Keep a running list of things to try. When something catches your eye, write it down so you don’t lose the idea. I have a list in my project management tool called Ideas. I include a few notes to myself about why I think the idea might be good for my business.
Review your list quarterly. When you sit down and look at your ideas list a few weeks or months later, some things will have lost their appeal. The ones that still seem worthwhile? Now you can formulate a plan and set aside time to work on them. If the answer is still, Not yet, but maybe someday, the idea stays on your list until the next time you review it.
Develop the discipline to say “no”
The solopreneurs who build sustainable businesses are the ones who learn to distinguish between opportunities and distractions. They know that changing directions too often holds them back. If you chase every shiny object, you sacrifice time you can spend on client work (or your personal time).
You need to have the discipline to say “not right now” to most things that cross your path. Dont be like mevibe-coding on a whim because an idea popped into my head.
{"blockType":"mv-promo-block","data":{"imageDesktopUrl":"https:\/\/images.fastcompany.com\/image\/upload\/f_webp,q_auto,c_fit\/wp-cms-2\/2025\/11\/work-better-1.png","imageMobileUrl":"https:\/\/images.fastcompany.com\/image\/upload\/f_webp,q_auto,c_fit\/wp-cms-2\/2025\/11\/work-better-mobile-1.png","eyebrow":"","headline":"\u003Cstrong\u003ESubscribe to Work Better\u003C\/strong\u003E","dek":"Thoughts on the future of work, career pivots, and why work shouldn\u0027t suck, by Anna Burgess Yang. To learn more, visit \u003Ca href=\u0022https:\/\/www.workbetter.media\/\u0022\u003Eworkbetter.media\u003C\/a\u003E.","subhed":"","description":"","ctaText":"SIGN UP","ctaUrl":"https:\/\/www.workbetter.media","theme":{"bg":"#f5f5f5","text":"#000000","eyebrow":"#9aa2aa","subhed":"#ffffff","buttonBg":"#000000","buttonHoverBg":"#3b3f46","buttonText":"#ffffff"},"imageDesktopId":91457605,"imageMobileId":91457608,"shareable":false,"slug":""}}
Mark Cubans enthusiasm for artificial intelligence is well known. He has called the technology the ultimate time-saving hack and bluntly stated that if youre not learning AI, youre fed. But with his latest investment, the billionaire bypassed the plethora of AI startups and focused instead on something more human-centered.
Cuban has invested an undisclosed amount in live events company Burwoodland, which produces nightlife experiences throughout the U.S., Canada, and Europe. The investment will make him a minority owner in the company.
Founded in 2015 by Alex Badanes and Ethan Maccoby, the New York City-based company says it has sold more than 1.5 million tickets to live events like Emo Night Brooklyn, Gimme Gimme Disco, All Your Friends, and Broadway Rave, which center on DJ sets that are themed to a certain musical genre.
Its time we all got off our asses, left the house, and had fun, said Cuban in a statement. Alex and Ethan know how to create amazing memories and experiences that people plan their weeks around. In an AI world, what you do is far more important than what you prompt.
Thats not the first time Cuban has touted the potential of real-world experiences in an increasingly AI-dominated environment. Last June, he took to social network Bluesky to write, Within the next 3 years, there will be so much AI, in particular AI video, people wont know if what they see or hear is real. Which will lead to an explosion of f2f [face-to-face] engagement, events, and jobs.
Burwoodland leans hard into that way of thinking, producing over 1,200 shows per year. Strategic partners of the company include music industry veterans Izzy Zivkovic (founder of artist management company Split Second, which counts Arcade Fire among its clients) and concert promoter Peter Shapiro. Klaf Companies, the investment and advisory platform founded by Justin Kalifowitz (who also created Downtown Music Holdings, which represents songwriting copyrights from John Lennon, Yoko Ono, Ray Davies, and One Direction), is also a partner.
Ethan and I started this company because we know firsthand how powerful it is to find your people through the music you love, Badanes said in a statement. That sense of community shaped our lives, and creating spaces where others can feel that connection has always been our purpose. Having the confidence of an investor as respected and accomplished as Mark is a tremendous honor.
With concert ticket prices continuing to escalate, Burwoodland keeps entry fees low, offering a low-cost live experience for music lovers. Tickets to its events generally run in the $20 to $40 range, though some events cost more. The company has already booked 2026 events in Milan, Brooklyn, Louisville, Nashville, and Antwerpand later this month will host the Long Live Emo Fest at Brooklyns Paramount theater, which holds up to 2,700 patrons.
The experiences have become popular enough that some of the artists being celebrated in the various genres Burwoodland focuses on have shown up at the events, with some even performing.
Maccoby and Badanes didnt plan to start a business. The two, who have been friends since childhood, began throwing house parties in college and kept up the practice afterward, when they lived in Brooklyn. When those soirees got too big for their apartment, they took over a nearby bar to host them and Burwoodland (named after an area in London where they grew up) was born. The duo quit their day jobs in 2022 to focus exclusively on the startup.
There has been increasing interest in the live event space from investors lately. Last June, NYC-based Fever, a live-entertainment discovery platform, secured a $100 million investment from L Catterton and Point72 Private Investments. And in September, DJ/producer Kygos company Palm Tree Crew (which hosts music festivals) received a $20 million Series B investment led by WME Group, giving it a $215 million valuation.Chris Morris
This article originally appeared on Fast Companys sister publication, Inc.
Inc. is the voice of the American entrepreneur. We inspire, inform, and document the most fascinating people in business: the risk-takers, the innovators, and the ultra-driven go-getters that represent the most dynamic force in the American economy.
Alphabet said on Wednesday it was targeting capital expenditure of $175 billion to $185 billion this year, in yet another aggressive ramp-up in spending from the Google parent as it deepens its investments to push ahead in the AI race.
Analysts on average had expected Alphabet to spend about $115.26 billion this year, according to data compiled by LSEG.
Shares of the company fell more than 6% in extended trading.
Revenue at Google Cloud grew 48%, to $17.7 billion, in the fourth quarter ended December, compared with analysts’ average estimate of a 35.2% jump, according to data compiled by LSEG.
Cloud computing majors have poured hundreds of billions of dollars to grow their AI infrastructure, both to meet the growing enterprise demand for their cloud services and to fuel their own development of AI technologies and products.
Like larger rivals Amazon Web Services and Microsofts Azure, Google Cloud has been grappling with capacity constraints that have dented its ability to fully cash in on AI demand from its customers.
Along with Meta, the three cloud companies are expected to collectively shell out more than $500 billion on AI this year. Meta last week hiked its capital investment for AI development this year by 73%, targeting spending between $115 billion and $135 billion, while Microsoft also reported record quarterly capital expenditure.
The aggressive expansion in outlay comes at a time when investors have increasingly grown concerned about payoffs from AI investments. However, Google has been able to show strong progress in its AI efforts.
The launch of its latest Gemini 3 model in November saw strong reception and propelled the company forward in the AI arms race. Following the launch, Sam Altman, CEO of AI frontrunner and ChatGPT-creator OpenAI, reportedly issued an internal “code red” to push teams to accelerate development.
Google’s Gemini AI assistant app exceeded 650 million users per month in November, while the company’s AI Overviews feature in search also reached more than 2 billion monthly users.
Last month, Google struck a deal to power Apples revamped Siri voice assistant with its Gemini models, a partnership that unlocks a huge market for Google, with Apple’s installed base of over 2.5 billion devices.
By Deborah Sophia, Reuters
Pizza Hut is closing hundreds of “underperforming” locations nationwide, according to parent company Yum! Brands, which reported fourth-quarter 2025 earnings on Wednesday.
The company said it will shutter about 3% of Pizza Hut’s U.S. locations, or some 250 locations in the first six months of 2026, as the fast-causal chain struggles amid competition from Dominos Pizza and an overall decline in store sales and consumer demand.
Fast Company has reached out to Pizza Hut for a list of locations that will be closing.
Globally, Pizza Hut opened over 440 new restaurants in the fourth quarter of 2025 and nearly 1,200 restaurants in 2025, in 65 countries.
Taco Bell sales soar
Yum! Brands reported mixed fourth-quarter results for 2025, with revenue coming in at $2.51 billion, beating expectations of $2.45 billion. It missed on earnings per share (EPS), which came in at $1.73 adjusted, compared to an expected $1.77.
Unlike Pizza Hut, Taco Bell and KFC showed strong sales growth, with Taco Bell’s same-store sales up 7% for the quarter. Meanwhile, KFC’s same-store sales were up about 1%, and it hit “an incredible milestone in opening its 30,000th international restaurant,” according to the company’s earnings call.
Yum! delivered another year of outstanding results at KFC and Taco Bell with our fundamentals stronger than ever at both brands,” CEO Chris Turner said in an earnings release. “We enter 2026 with a clear strategic focus on accelerating long-term growth, embodied in our multi-year ‘Raise the Bar’ priorities.”
Shares of Yum! Brands (YUM) were trading down less than 1% on Wednesday in afternoon trading, and have jumped 6% so far this year.
February is always difficult in Minneapolis. Its when the nerve-flaying cold of December and January starts to seem like a dress rehearsal. But this February has proven brutal for other reasons. As thousands of ICE agents storm the city with lethal force, many residents have larger troubles than the arctic weather. Some are terrified of getting detained or deported; others are worried about getting attacked for documenting the chaos or for helping their neighbors.
A Minneapolis food scene staple for the past 15 years, Modern Times and its customers have been front row for unrest before. Just six blocks from where George Floyd was murdered six years ago, the Powderhorn Park restaurant also sits three blocks from where Renee Nicole Good was killed by an ICE agent on Jan. 7. Owner Dylan Alverson has long celebrated the areas diversity with his eclectic menu, but nowamid ICEs occupation of the cityhes found a way to use his food to support people in the community, many of whom are afraid to leave their homes for fear of being stopped by federal agents and asked to prove citizenship.
I was like, let’s figure out how to provide restaurant-quality meals for people for free if they’re hiding or even just dealing with this conflict in all the ways people in South Minneapolis are dealing with it, Alverson says. I wanted to break down that price barrier so people could just enjoy being in a space and not worry about money.
Initially, he instituted what he called The Peoples Pricefree food for anyone who asked for it at checkout. Word about the program got around quickly. Going by point-of-sale transactions, Alverson estimates around 25% of customers started eating for free during the first week. But people who could comfortably afford their meals seemed to appreciate the offer as well.
We were getting a ton of people coming in to pay for more than they were ordering, the owner says. It was like, Oh, yeah, I forgot: We’re in Minnesota. And Minnesotans, if they don’t need something, for the most part, they will never take it.
By adding this new option, Modern Times was providing sustenance for everyone other than ICEfood for those who couldnt afford it, and a sense of solidarity for anyone else feeling overwhelmed by the ongoing crisis.
Staff members started making deliveries whenever possible, to people who couldnt leave their homes to go to work and who were having difficulty paying rent as a result. When the team became overwhelmed balancing these trips with their usual restaurant duties, Alverson blasted out emails asking others to come in and gather free meals to bring to their neighbors. Volunteers showed up in droves, including several former employees.
As ICEs hold on Minneapolis remained firm, though, Alverson became further entrenched in a community-minded approach to running a restaurantmoving from a free-food option to making the entire menu free for everyone. (ICE against still excluded.)
Post Modern Times
Less than a week after Modern Times instituted The Peoples Price, on Alversons first morning off in weeks, federal agents shot and killed Alex Pretti. Alverson heard the news at home and immediately rushed over to the scene, about a mile and a half away from the restaurant, where his wife soon joined him. They could do little more than watch as they say agents responded to witnesses and passersby with violence and aggression. A feeling of horror washed over them.
I realized then that the government’s going to keep killing us until they get whatever it is they’re trying to get out of us, Alverson says. And it shook me. I was just, like, Fuck it, all bets are off. And that’s when I decided I wanted to take this as far as I can.
On Jan. 26, Alverson announced on the restaurants Instagram that Modern Times would switch to a free and donations-based model until ICE no longer occupied the city. He also re-dubbed the eatery Post Modern Timesadding a frisson of before-and-after demarcation, while also enabling Alverson to incorporate the new name as a nonprofit arm of the restaurant.
Before implementing these changes, though, the owner first had to make sure his staff was on board.
On the day after Pretti was killed, Alverson closed down the restaurant and asked his staff to come in for a meeting. It began with a short speech denouncing the occupation. The owner was sick of generating money for the soldiers in our streets, and for a government that won’t protect us, he said, and he would no longer continue doing so.
We refuse to generate taxes under the guise of a functioning for-profit capitalist business aligned with government strategy, he later wrote inthe Instagram announcement, which was virtually identical to the speech he gave his staff that Sunday. Modern Times had barely been scraping by since 2020, anyway; now, it would operate as a free and donation-based restaurant. Any employees interested in helping out were welcome to volunteer, but everyone else could instead use their earned sick-and-safe timea Minnesotan paid-leave benefit. Either way, everyone would still get paid.
The staff was emphatic in their support. Many of them had been burning to do more for their community throughout the occupation. Now, theyd be contributing just by going to work.
Never going back
Based on how The Peoples Price went over, Alverson expected a positive reaction to his announcement. He had not imagined it would be quite as staggering.
So many texts, emails and social media messages poured in from around the world, Alverson had to put his kids to work sorting through it all. Scrolling the restaurants Venmo account at any time now inevitably leads to donations from people in cities like Seattle, Chicago, and Buffalo, along with raised-fist emojis, prayer hands, and the occasional middle finger next to an ice cube.
And then theres the diner turnout, which has made Post Modern Times jam-packed every day. Despite streamlining the menu for maximum kitchen efficiency, the volume of incoming orders has been so heavy, guests can now expect to spend two hours at the restaurant, from the moment they join the line until they pay their check. (Or dont pay.)
The magnitude has been surprising, Alverson says. Were now under the weight of, like, its our busiest day of the year, every day.
Fortunately, although plenty of diners are coming in for the free food, Alverson says the restaurant is still at a point where more people are coming to donate and just be supportive. Although the owner sees his restaurant as an example for eateries in other cities that might come under occupation soon, he stresses that the model might not work for everyone. In the same way Radioheads pay-what-you-want album, In Rainbows, generated millions of dollars upon its 2007 release because it was, in fact, a Radiohead album, the Post Modern Times experiment owes its initial success to having spent 15 years as a pillar of the community.
As for the restaurants future, Alverson wants the spirit of this project to live on well after the siege of Minneapolis has ended. He imagines Post Modern Times evolving into a nonprofit wing of the restauant, subsidizing not only wages and benefits for the staff, but some form of free food for guests in needwhether its the Peoples Price or something else. When it comes to doing business as usual at Modern Times, well, those times may have passed.
The old system wasn’t working for anyone, Alverson says. There’s not a single restaurant I know of that was thriving or even making money off of this stage of capitalism. So, no, I will never go back to that.
Just in time for the Super Bowl, PepsiCo is cutting the price of Doritos, Cheetos, Lay’s, Tostitos, and other snacks by up to 15%.
The move comes after consumers complained the chips were too pricey. “Our customers . . . have been honest with us about how rising everyday costs are making their daily decisions harder. Message received,” PepsiCo said in a statement.
Lowering the suggested retail price reflects our commitment to help reduce the pressure where we can,” PepsiCo Foods U.S. CEO Rachel Ferdinando added.
The new discounted prices roll out this week, ahead of this Sunday’s big game, one of the biggest days for snack purchases. PepsiCo said supermarkets and other retailers ultimately set the prices for the chips, so the savings that shoppers see will depend on the store.
And no, you’re not imagining it: Grocery prices have increased. In one year alone they jumped 2.7%, from August 2024 to August 2025; and they’re up a reported 29% from 2020, according to the Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis. That’s due to several factors, including inflation, weather events, and ongoing global supply chain issues, coupled with higher labor costs from the COVID-19 pandemic.
The food and beverage giant, like many of its competitors, has raised prices, hiking snacks by 1% and beverages by 7% in North America, which, along with the impact of GLP-1 weight-loss drugs, has only decreased consumer demand.
“This pricing change is part of PepsiCos broader strategy to increase accessibility and offer more choices for consumers,” Ferdinando said. “Were continuing to refine our portfoliofrom thoughtful recipe enhancements, like the removal of artificial flavors and colors from Lays and Tostitos, to packaging updates aligned with evolving consumer preferences.”
PepsiCo had previously agreed to lower prices and revamp its business, after activist investor Elliott Management demanded the changes after disclosing a $4 billion stake in the company this past September, CNN reported.
PepsiCo financials
PepsiCo’s fourth-quarter earnings, released on Tuesday, beat analyst estimates, with quarterly revenue coming in at $29.34 billion versus an expected $28.97 billion, and earnings per share (EPS) of $2.26 adjusted versus an expected $2.24.
Shares of PepsiCo (Nasdaq: PEP) were up over 3% midday on Wednesday, at the time of this writing, after closing nearly 5% higher the previous day.
Rent can eat up an entire paycheck at the start of the month, so a growing number of renters are turning to a financial product that promises relief by letting them split the bill for a price.
So-called rent now, pay later services have emerged over the past few years as housing costs climb and paychecks grow less predictable, particularly for lower-income and gig-economy workers. According to the Bureau of Labor Statistics, rents have jumped nearly 28% in past five years.
Companies such as Flex, Livble, and, more recently, Affirm, say breaking rent into multiple payments can help renters manage cash flow. But consumer advocates warn the products typically function like short-term loans, layering fees onto already strained budgets and, in some cases, carrying triple-digit effective interest rates raising questions about whether they ease financial pressure or deepen it.
Kellen Johnson, 44, started using Flex to split up his rent payments about two years ago. Instead of paying the whole $1,850 of his rent on the first of the month, Johnson would pay $1,350 on that date, and $500 on the 15th. For the service, Flex collected a $14.99 monthly subscription fee, as well as 1% of the total rent, which for Johnson was $18.50, bringing his monthly charges for the app to more than $33.
Johnson said he was willing to pay the extra costs in part because he worked as an independently contracted delivery person for Amazon at the time, and his paychecks could vary.
It was an expense that I was incurring, but I went ahead as it was more convenient, said Johnson, who now works as a driver for senior citizens in Sacramento, California.
Roughly 109 million Americans, or about 42.5 million households, are renters in the United States. The Census Bureau estimated in 2024 that a large share of those households pay 30% or more of their monthly income on rent. The bureau considers such households to be cost burdened, meaning rent consumes so much of their income that they have less ability to plan for future expenses or build wealth.
Rent now, pay later services generally operate the same way: The company pays the landlord the full rent when due, and the renter repays the company in two or more installments over the course of the month. Because rent can be such a large expense, the companies argue that spreading payments out can give renters more cash on hand.
Many of these services come with fees. The fees can be structured differently but should be generally thought of as cost of credit, consumer advocates warn. In Johnsons case, he was paying $33.49 for a two-week loan of $500, for an effective annual percentage rate of 172%, when expressed using standard consumer-lending calculations.
Renters should be skeptical of any financing providers that have partnered with a landlord, and be skeptical of anything that sells itself as no fees or no interest, said Mike Pierce, executive director of Protect Borrowers. Pierce previously worked at the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau and co-authored a report that was released this week on the industry.
Launched in 2019, Flex is one of the largest companies focused on splitting rent payments. The company says its 1.5 million customers now send about $2 billion a month in rent through its system, and several of the countrys largest landlords accept Flex as a payment option.
Flex says most of its customers are lower-income renters with weaker credit profiles. The company reports a median credit score of 604 among its users and says about one in three customers works more than one job to make ends meet. A Flex spokesman says the average customer uses the service three to four times a year. Johnson used it every month.
Livble does not charge a subscription, but charges renters a fee ranging from $30 to $40, according to the companys help page. Depending on how long the renter defers part of the payment, Livbles fees can translate into effective annual percentage rates of roughly 104% to 139%.
The buy now, pay later company Affirm said this month that it is piloting a program allowing some customers to split rent into two payments. The program is being tested in partnership with Esusu, a company that reports rent payments to credit bureaus to help consumers build credit. An Affirm spokesman said the company is not charging renters interest or fees to use the product, but may charge landlords fees.
As another financing option, landlords are increasingly accepting credit cards for rent payments. Bilt, a credit card startup, built its brand around targeting renters when it launched, and some tenants also use credit cards to accumulate rewards or points.
But paying rent by credit card can also be costly. Landlords typically pass the processing fees on to tenants. Depending on the card issuer and payment network, these fees can range from about 2.5% to 3.5% of the rent. For a renter paying $1,500 a month, that translates to roughly $37.50 to $52.50 in fees a monthly cost comparable to what services like Livble and Flex charge.
Economists and renters advocates argue that none of these financing options address the fundamental issue of affordability in the rental market. If credit cards, or flexible rent payment options become more widely used, they worry rents could rise further as landlords start factoring in a potential renters weekly cash flow as opposed to the rental market in the area the building is located in.
Merchants already pass along credit card processing costs to customers in the form of higher prices, and advocates worry that the rental market could adopt similar patterns. For example, Livble is owned by RealPage, which last year settled allegations that its algorithm allowed landlords to collude and push rents higher.
By Ken Sweet and Cora Lewis, The Associated Press
Economics Writer Christopher Rugaber contributed.
