Author: admin

• I was living with my boyfriend when we broke up, and he suggested that we stay roommates.
• After looking into my options, I realized that living together might be the best financial move.
• It was awkward at first, but acknowledging the situation and setting boundaries helped.

I met my ex in Spain, on a warm October night in 2024. He approached me as we were both walking home from a boxing class and confidently started a conversation.

About two weeks later, we went on our first date. A few months after that, we took our first weekend trip together. In April, he surprised me with a key to his home. By June, I’d moved in.

Our relationship was built on genuine care for one another. Throughout our relationship, we always sought to support each other’s well-being and growth. Of course, we had bumps here and there, but they were never significant enough to change our respect for each other.

That’s why, when we agreed to break up in August because we saw our lives going in different directions, I wasn’t at all surprised that we found a way to continue living together.

We broke up, but I stayed at my ex’s house

Under normal circumstances, I would’ve moved out as soon as possible. I’ve always believed that you can’t start to heal from a breakup until you cut all ties and communication with your ex.

So, I bought the boxes, tape, and bubble wrap, started looking for apartments, and began packing.

But then two weeks later, I lost a freelance contract that contributed a significant portion to my income. This, coupled with the fact that I was already in the middle of a lengthy visa process to make Spain my long-term home, only added to the stress of going through a breakup.

Seeing the distress I was enduring, my ex sat me down and suggested that I continue to live with him until I was able to get back on my feet again.

My first thought was that people would think I was out of my mind for choosing to live with an ex. Then, I started weighing the pros and the cons.

If I stayed, housing would be one less thing I’d have to worry about … but every day, I would have to see someone I’d just broken up with. Worst of all, I’d have to treat my ex like a roommate, as if we didn’t just spend the past two years in an affectionate relationship.

If I decided to move out, I wouldn’t have to see my ex every day, and I could focus on healing my broken heart alone — but I’d be in a tough financial situation.

Unlike my ex — who’s lenient and open to pulling some extra weight when I can’t make rent or contribute 50/50 on utilities — I knew that a landlord wouldn’t necessarily care about my personal situation once the first of the month rolled around.

I chose to keep living with him.

At first, there was an adjustment period

Those first few weeks were awkward. We’d already had separate bedrooms because of my ex’s insomnia, but the changes to our routines and interactions felt foreign.

Instead of getting a text inviting me to come cuddle with him on Sunday mornings, my phone remained silent. Instead of getting ready and walking to the gym together in the afternoon, I started going in the morning.

Instead of sitting down to have dinner together, we ate at different times in different rooms. Whenever we saw each other, we would force a smile, say hi, and go our separate ways.

We didn’t acknowledge the strangeness of our situation until one moment broke down the barrier. I was used to having crying sessions in my room, but this time, one snuck up on me while I sat in the living room. The stress of my breakup, finances, and living situation had just built up too much.

My ex was passing through the living room when he saw me crying and gently asked if he could give me a hug. I nodded.

This interaction prompted us to finally discuss the elephant in the room (well, house): Living with your ex is weird. Simply addressing the situation and talking about how we were both coping instantly made it feel a little bit lighter.

We found a new way to live together

What followed was a conversation about how we wanted living together to look like. We knew we were doing something unusual, which was daunting, but also meant we were free to make our own rules.

Our first decision was to stop acting like strangers. Barely acknowledging each other’s existence just didn’t work for us, so we welcomed a level of friendliness into our new relationship.

Then, we decided we’d continue offering each other a certain level of emotional support. My ex recently took a leave of absence from work to heal from burnout and contemplate his next career move.

Meanwhile, I was struggling to find full-time work and sustain the life I was building abroad. Being there for each other when one of us needed a listening ear felt important.

Lastly, we agreed not to cross any lines that would confuse the other person. We weren’t in a romantic relationship anymore, so we decided that any affection beyond a friendly hug would be prohibited.

With this, our living situation went from something that felt unbearable to something that works for us. In the next few months, I plan to save enough from my freelance work to move out. Until then, I’m happy knowing I have a home, even if it’s with my ex.

• The Wall Street Journal has been planning a big streaming TV push with an ambitious slate of shows.
• It’s explored shows around editor in chief Emma Tucker and creators like Feed Me’s Emily Sundberg.
• Sundberg dropped out of talks a few weeks ago, Business Insider has learned.

The Wall Street Journal has been ramping up its push into video and had plans for an ambitious slate of streaming TV shows.

Internal documents viewed by Business Insider described an initial six-series offering that would include a flagship live morning program and an interview show hosted by the Journal’s editor in chief, Emma Tucker. The docs are from the summer, and a person familiar with the Journal’s strategy said that its plans, including dates and partners, are in flux.

The docs said the Journal had been “in negotiations” with creators such as Feed Me Substacker Emily Sundberg, as well as with the restaurant discovery platform The Infatuation. Sundberg dropped out of the talks a few weeks ago, Business Insider has learned.

The plans called for the shows to launch on the Journal’s own channels, YouTube, and social media.

Journal parent company Dow Jones is also hiring a head of programming and content, who would be tasked with building “something ambitious in video.” The live job description says the role will pay up to $330,000 in base salary, and involve developing talent that includes employees and external creators, translating the company’s journalism into streaming formats, and creating live and on-demand shows.

The Journal and Dow Jones’s effort shows how news outlets traditionally known for the written word — including The New York Times — are racing to beef up their video offerings in a media landscape that’s seeing both the rise of social video and the decline of cable TV news. It also demonstrates that Tucker is taking a flexible approach to the market by looking to both build shows around in-house talent, including herself, and partner with creators and other media companies.

“Expanding our video presence across Dow Jones and The Wall Street Journal is a major strategic priority, as we have widely communicated,” a Dow Jones spokesperson said. “We are actively hiring leadership to shape and execute our go-to-market strategy for video across Dow Jones, and we look forward to sharing our updated plans when ready.”

The Journal name-checked familiar figures

The internal docs viewed by Business Insider described the live morning show as a 60-minute-long anchor of the initial slate. The docs said the Journal enlisted some familiar names in morning news and video to help execute the show. They said the Journal has been working with the production company EverWonder, which was cofounded by the former Time Studios executive Ian Orefice with backing from Jeff Zucker’s RedBird IMI.

Another show in the proposed slate in the docs was “The Exchange with Emma Tucker,” which was billed as a “prestige interview franchise” that would put viewers “in the room with the people running the global economy.” The documents name-checked top CEOs, including Microsoft’s Satya Nadella, JPMorgan Chase’s Jamie Dimon, and BlackRock’s Larry Fink, as potential guests.

The person familiar with the Journal’s strategy said the documents represented one of a number of different avenues the outlet was exploring and didn’t reflect the current status and form of its efforts. The person said the company is in active conversations with a number of external people for potential partnerships.

The documents said the Journal had been “in negotiations” with Sundberg — which have since ended — for a show called “Feed Me, On Camera” that would introduce her “highly engaged, younger creator audience to WSJ while bringing WSJ’s scale, authority, and affluent professional audience to her world.” The docs envisioned each episode beginning with a “tip, obsession, or question from the Feed Me universe,” and following Sundberg to its conclusion while integrating business context and reporting from the Journal.

Other shows the docs said the Journal had explored included one called “Market Price with The Infatuation” that would tackle the “business behind taste, literally.” It would combine the cultural authority and young audience of The Infatuation, now owned by JPMorgan Chase, with the Journal’s business reporting chops.

Another was “Inside Sports” (“title to change”), a “next generation reboot of ‘Real Sports’ for the sports-as-an-asset class era,” potentially helmed by Emmy-winning TV journalist Armen Keteyian.

The documents said the Journal had been “in negotiations” with The Infatuation and “in discussions” with Keteyian. Business Insider could not confirm the status of those discussions.

The last series listed in the docs was an AI show that aimed to get a big-name host.

The Journal compared its plans to ‘The Daily’

In the docs, the Journal expressed big ambitions for a live morning news show, and said there had been “nothing new” in the category for a professional audience “in a decade.” The last entry on a timeline included in the planning docs was The New York Times’ “The Daily” in 2017, which has become a reliable top show on the podcast charts and one of the paper’s most successful launches.

“We see an opportunity to reinvent the category,” the documents said. The Journal also has its own daily news podcast, called “The Journal.”

Like the Times, the Journal is in a rare position in a challenged media environment to make a transformative investment. The Journal, part of Rupert Murdoch’s News Corp., is profitable, helped by an early move to paywall its journalism.

The documents said that in its video push, the Journal aimed to produce 20 hours of video a week, expand to a free, ad-supported streaming (FAST) channel, and add subscription options and other formats as demand warranted. Between WSJ TV, existing video shows, licensed shows, and co-productions with creators, the Journal aspired to be an “always-on streaming channel.” The person familiar with the Journal’s strategy said those goals didn’t represent its current plans.

Tucker took the helm at the Journal in 2023, moving from the Murdoch-owned UK Sunday Times with a plan to increase engagement with the Journal’s digital products. Digital subscriptions rose 8% to 4.5 million in the three months ended June 30 versus the year-ago period. She has called for more lively writing and enterprise reporting. The Journal had already begun to reorient its video strategy under its former head of video Maral Usefi. Under Usefi, the video team had grown by a third, to 65 people, as of April. She was succeeded by Samantha Henig, who was hired in July to lead a new multimedia team.

The docs said that with the Journal’s new effort, it aimed to combine its authority and scale with the personality of creator-led media and modern distribution. In terms of audience, it intended to reach a younger viewership than the traditional business TV audience and more decision-makers than creator-led media.

It projected reaching about 75 million viewers through Dow Jones’ social reach, upward of 5.6 million monthly watch hours by its 2028 fiscal year, and ad rates that were three to five times what business content on YouTube commands. The person familiar with the Journal’s strategy didn’t say if those figures represented its current ambitions.

The Journal made a big push into original video more than a decade ago, including the launch of video app WSJ Live in 2011 and expanding to episodic video doc series. Publishers overall have newly reprioritized video amid the rise of short-form content, YouTube’s increasing popularity on TV screens, and the success of new live shows like TBPN.

While embracing creator talent — and getting its own staff involved in video content — could help the Journal reach a younger audience, it comes with risks. Journalists who become on-camera talent can often command higher paydays, or defect to start their own ventures, like The New York Times’ “Hard Fork” hosts Kevin Roose and Casey Newton did recently. Creators often have their own audiences, which give them leverage over a news organization that staff reporters might not have.

Flagship video shows are also expensive to produce, which makes high ad rates crucial to the Journal’s success with this slate. The internal docs explored pitching a variety of ways for advertisers to get involved, including as launch partners, with category-exclusive partnerships, and as “moment partners” tied to major news events like elections, earnings, and WSJ specials.

• United CEO Scott Kirby says he’s all for a nationwide wealth tax.
• Kirby said wealth inequality “has become a danger to our society.”
• While Kirby doesn’t want a state-by-state approach, California voters will soon vote on a proposed billionaire tax.

United CEO Scott Kirby says “wealth inequality has become a danger to our society.”

That’s why Kirby said he supports a nationwide wealth tax.

“We should have a national wealth tax — it won’t work by state because people will just move,” Kirby recently told The New York Times.

Kirby, who lives in the Chicago area near United’s headquarters, was one of the highest-paid CEOs of a public company in 2025, according to Crain’s Chicago Business. Kirby’s 2025 total compensation was valued at over $32 million, according to United’s filing with the Securities and Exchange Commission.

Wealth taxes are facing one of their biggest tests yet this November. Californians will vote on what, if approved, would become the world’s first billionaire tax.

The fight is pitting some of the state’s wealthiest individuals against the proposal. Google cofounder Sergey Brin alone has donated $102 million to a group seeking to undercut the proposed wealth tax by proposing competing initiatives that could effectively cancel it out.

In addition to a wealth tax, Kirby also said that inheritance taxes should be increased.

“We should have inheritance taxes that get close to 100 percent at some level,” he said. “I would pay them.”

Kirby’s views may seem unusual among corporate leaders, but others are at least open to the idea of wealth taxes.

Nvidia CEO Jensen Huang recently reiterated his willingness to pay potentially billions of dollars if California’s wealth tax goes into effect.

“I don’t mind paying taxes,” Huang said. “The more you make, the more taxes you pay, so I’m OK with it.”

Huang, who famously got his start working at Denny’s, said he worries about other things. Bloomberg estimates that the Nvidia CEO is now worth $180 billion, making him the ninth richest person in the world.

“The fact that I can afford to pay $8 billion in taxes over five years is a privilege,” he said. “I’m not afraid of paying taxes. I’m just afraid of being poor.”

• Joel Kaplan, Meta’s chief global affairs officer, is leaving, Meta confirmed to Business Insider.
• Kaplan, a Republican who once worked for the Bush administration, spent 15 years at Meta.
• Kaplan helped bridge ties between Meta CEO Mark Zuckerberg and President Donald Trump.

A longtime political operative at Meta who played a key role in bridging ties between the company and President Donald Trump’s administration is leaving.

Joel Kaplan, Meta’s chief global affairs officer, will leave after the midterm elections and a transition period, Axios first reported. Meta confirmed the report to Business Insider.

A veteran Marine Corps artillery officer, Kaplan is a Republican who served as an advisor and deputy chief of staff to former president George W. Bush.

Kaplan joined Meta in 2011. At Meta, he oversaw the company’s response to policy issues ranging from the Cambridge Analytica scandal to the end of its fact-checking program.

Kaplan helped repair a once-fraught relationship between Meta CEO Mark Zuckerberg and Trump after Meta temporarily suspended Trump’s account following the January 6 riot.

Kaplan posted on X on Tuesday that he plans to spend time with his family and figure out what to do next.

Kaplan didn’t respond to a request for comment from Business Insider.

Kaplan has served as Meta’s chief global affairs officer since 2025, succeeding former UK politician Nick Clegg. Other Meta executives will share his responsibilities, Axios reported.

Have a tip? Contact this reporter securely on Signal at charlesrollet.12 or +1-628-282-2811. Use a personal email address and a non-work device; here’s our guide to sharing information securely.

• Dean Karnazes holds the world record for the longest distance a human has ever run nonstop.
• His advice for going farther than you think you can: redefine success before the race begins.
• When the pain hits, Karnazes says there’s one rule: keep moving — even if you have to walk.

For decades, scientists have tried to understand what separates people capable of extraordinary endurance from everyone else. Is it genetics? VO₂ max? Pain tolerance? Mental toughness?

Dean Karnazes has spent more than 30 years giving them a remarkable case study.

He’s run 50 marathons in 50 states in 50 consecutive days, crossed Death Valley in the middle of summer, and in 2005 set the record for the longest nonstop run — covering 350 miles in 80 hours and 44 minutes.

Even that wasn’t enough.

“I actually made it 350 miles, which was somewhat of a letdown because I thought maybe I could run 500 miles,” Karnazes told me. “That was kind of the ultimate goal.” His world record still stands today, 21 years later.

After decades of ultrarunning, Karnazes says he’s learned that doing hard things comes down to a handful of simple habits that anyone can practice.

Don’t make winning the goal

Karnazes has finished on the podium plenty of times, but he says that’s never been what pulled him to the starting line.

“I do it for the adventure,” he said. “Both the inner and the outer adventure. I’ve never really said I want to win a race. I just thought, be the best Dean that Dean can be on race day.”

He says approaching races that way has changed how he defines success. The podium, if it comes, is just the cherry on top.

That mindset, he says, has kept him motivated through hundreds of marathons and ultramarathons, long after chasing trophies stopped being interesting.

Redefine what success looks like

When Karnazes gives advice to new ultrarunners, he doesn’t start with mileage or pace.

“Just set your goal on finishing,” he said. “Don’t say I want to do it in sub five hours or sub six hours. Just say, ‘For me, success is reaching the finish line before the cutoff.'”

Karnazes says that approach has a way of changing how you see your own limits.

“You’ll prove to yourself that you’re better than you think you are. And you can go further than you think you could.”

Keep moving, even if you have to slow down

The advice sounds simple, but following it is another story.

At some point during his 350-mile run, Karnazes stopped trusting what he was seeing.

After nearly three days without sleep, he said he started hallucinating. He felt as though he had left his own body and was watching himself from above.

“When you’re in these altered states, it’s as though you don’t have conscious control of your mind,” he said. “You’re fighting your mind to stay present, but your mind gets away from you.”

Despite that, he kept running.

I asked Karnazes for his advice to aspiring ultrarunners who worry they’ll hit a point where the pain becomes too much.

“You walk if you have to,” he said. “You slow down, you push through the pain, and you come out the other side, and you’re rejuvenated.”

• The Marines are fielding new medical gear to treat casualties when evacuation is delayed.
• New portable blood coolers and warmers will help corpsmen treat wounded troops closer to combat.
• AI-assisted ultrasounds could help front-line medics identify internal injuries and prioritize evacuation.

The US Marine Corps has begun fielding new medical equipment meant to help troops survive when wounded service members can’t be quickly evacuated from the battlefield.

The new technology is designed to store blood, identify internal injuries, and treat wounded service members closer to the battlefield as the military prepares for future wars in which casualties may be unable to reach a hospital for hours or even days.

The equipment includes improved, lighter-weight mobile blood coolers, better blood warmers, and small AI-assisted ultrasound devices and is designed to help Navy corpsmen and other providers treat casualties with less bulky equipment and less reliance on extensive medical infrastructure.

During the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan, US air supremacy frequently allowed helicopters to quickly evacuate wounded troops to well-equipped and defended medical facilities near the battlefield.

The proliferation of drone warfare and other technological advancements seen in Ukraine has, however, raised doubts about whether rapid casualty evacuations will be possible in future conflicts. Now, military planners assume that a sophisticated foe is likely to possess tools that could severely disrupt military tasks such as casualty evacuation, resupply, and communications.

Throughout the post 9/11 wars in the Middle East, the military planned on getting wounded troops to advanced medical facilities within an hour, said Navy Capt. Shari Gentry, the Marine Corps’ deputy medical officer, speaking to reporters at a media event near Quantico, Virginia. “And we do not foresee that being the case.”

The Corps has already begun distributing the systems to medical units, with some equipment reaching troops deployed to the Middle East.

Among the new devices is a portable refrigerator capable of storing approximately 30 units of blood, potentially enough for four seriously wounded Marines, according to military medical guidance. Each battalion aid station is set to receive one, giving medical personnel a supply of blood closer to the battlefield.

Weighing about 60 pounds, it replaces a system that weighs over twice as much and uses rechargeable batteries already common throughout the Marine Corps. The smaller refrigerator allows medical teams to maintain blood supplies without relying continuously on generators or fuel deliveries, said Navy Cmdr. Kyleigh Hupfl, the Corps’ clinical lead for Expeditionary Medical Systems.

The capability has already proved useful in the Middle East, Hupfl said. The Corps accelerated delivery after units raised concerns about the reliability of existing refrigeration equipment. One unit told her that the new device allowed it to maintain a ready supply of blood throughout its deployment.

Small deviations in temperature can render blood and other pharmaceuticals unusable. “We need to be able to bring cold chain distribution forward without relying on heavy generators, and we need to be able to do that in a sustainable way,” she said.

The service is also fielding new portable blood warmers that can deliver warmed fluids faster than the previous equipment. The warmer works by passing blood through a tube, warming it before it flows into a patient’s veins. Such warmth is crucial to prevent hypothermia, a serious complication in injured patients.

Another major change involves portable ultrasound machines equipped with AI-assisted imaging. Previously held only at higher levels of battlefield medical care, the new machines are now being pushed toward the lowest level of tactical care, known as Role 1 facilities, where Navy corpsmen and physicians provide immediate life-saving care for wounded Marines.

The AI software helps users identify anatomical structures on ultrasound images, allowing providers with less ultrasound experience to spot signs of internal bleeding or other injuries that might otherwise be difficult to detect. That information can also help medical teams determine which casualties need evacuation or surgery most urgently, said Navy Chief Petty Officer Matthew Brown, the chief biomedical equipment technician for the Corps’ Expeditionary Medical Systems.

“I have 10 people that are hurt. Who should I get out?” Brown said of the dilemma and the new ultrasounds being fielded to front-line medics to address it. “And at the end of the day, that’s what’s going to save their life.”