Author: admin

• As a trained chef, I believe the key to cooking a great meal is following the kitchen basics.
• Resting protein at room temperature before and after cooking it improves the texture and flavor.
• Without properly preheating a pan or oven, a dish is doomed before it ever hits heat.

Most cooking disasters don’t result from botching fancy techniques, and I say that as someone who graduated from a top Parisian culinary institute and has over 30 years of professional cooking experience.

In truth, it’s small, inconspicuous habits that sabotage most dishes.

I believe that excellent cooking isn’t about mastering complicated techniques or buying expensive ingredients. It’s about paying attention to kitchen fundamentals and respecting the cooking process.

Fixing these common missteps, which I see repeatedly from cooks of all levels, can make a noticeable difference in foods’ flavor and texture.

Applying heat to protein too soon can cause it to cook unevenly.

Taking protein straight from the refrigerator and throwing it into a hot pan is one of the fastest ways to cook it unevenly. The exterior cooks at a faster rate than the interior, so it’s overdone by the time the center is cooked.

I let meat or fish sit at room temperature before I cook it for a more even result. Exact timing depends on the protein — fish fillets usually only need 15 minutes, whereas thick pieces of chicken breasts, pork chops, or steaks benefit from 30 minutes to an hour on the counter.

I stick to this rule regardless of whether I cook the protein in my sauté pan, griddle, or grill. It’s become somewhat second nature.

Whenever I make a thick ribeye steak or a side of salmon for guests, I make a mental note to start the cooking process by pulling the meat or fish out of the refrigerator before prepping everything else.

Salting fish or meat before it reaches room temperature can mess with its texture.

I wait to season my protein until it’s had a chance to sit at room temperature, especially if I use salt.

If I salt steaks or fish too early, for example, it can draw moisture to the surface and interfere with browning.

I let the protein lose its chill first, pat it dry, and then season it right before it hits the pan, grill, or oven for optimal sear and texture.

A pan that isn’t properly preheated won’t sear food.

This tip is a practice in patience. A pan that isn’t fully preheated will slowly cook your food into a pale, sad version of what it could be, and the same goes for an oven that hasn’t reached temperature.

Preheating isn’t a suggestion — it’s part of the cooking process. An under-heated pan won’t sear your food, but an overheated pan can burn the outside of food before the inside has time to cook, especially with delicate proteins like fish.

I like to give my pan a couple of minutes over medium-high heat before adding oil, keeping close tabs on the pan’s temperature using a laser thermometer gun.

If I’m cooking with my oven, I wait until it’s reached the desired temperature — which I check with an oven thermometer — rather than when it beeps.

Chopping, slicing, and dicing with dull knives can ruin the entire cooking process.

A dull knife does a cook no favors. It crushes herbs instead of slicing them, tears through proteins, and makes even simple prep feel like a chore. It can also be dangerous, as it requires more force and can easily lead to a loss of control.

A sharp knife glides, creates clean cuts, and makes everything from chopping onions to slicing steak faster and more precise. It’s a nonnegotiable in every kitchen, and I always recommend cooks invest in a knife sharpener.

If cared for properly, a good knife should last a long time. I’ve used the same ones in my home kitchen for years because I diligently maintain them.

Using a honing steel regularly helps keep the edge aligned so the knife stays sharp for longer. That said, most recreational home cooks only need to sharpen a quality chef’s knife once a year.

Waiting to taste food until after it’s fully cooked makes some mistakes irreversible.

I taste my food throughout the cooking process, as I build seasoning over time.

Once it touches my tongue, I know whether the dish needs salt, acid, or balance before it’s too late to adjust. Once it’s already reduced, thickened, or finished cooking, it’s harder to make adjustments.

For example, if I realize a soup or pasta sauce lacks seasoning once it’s done, adding more salt might help, but the flavor might taste flat since the seasoning didn’t fully cook in the dish.

I usually taste my dishes at every step that alters the flavor — after seasoning, reducing, adding acid, or combining the ingredients — to maintain control over the final result.

Cutting into protein too soon after cooking is one of the most overlooked errors.

Few things irk me more than seeing someone slice into a beautiful piece of chicken, steak, or fish too soon. When I watch all the juices run out onto the cutting board, all I see is lost flavor.

Meat continues cooking even after you remove it from heat. Called carryover cooking, it happens because the residual heat from the outside continues moving inward as the protein rests.

For example, a steak I take off the grill at 130 degrees Fahrenheit can climb to 135 degrees Fahrenheit within a few minutes of resting at room temperature.

I remove meats from the heat source when they’re a few degrees shy of my desired temperature, as the carryover heat can raise the internal temperature.

When a protein rests, it allows the juices to redistribute and the carryover heat to gently finish cooking it. Skipping this step can cause dry out even perfectly cooked meat.

• President Donald Trump was expected to sign an executive order on AI oversight this week, but the event was postponed.
• “I didn’t like certain aspects of it,” Trump said, adding that he worried the order might slow US efforts to beat China in AI.
• A draft of the unsigned executive order, obtained by POLITICO, emphasizes that government AI reviews would be voluntary.

POLITICO has obtained a draft of the executive order on artificial intelligence that President Donald Trump had been expected to sign Thursday afternoon, only to abruptly postpone the event.

The document — available here — was meant to address concerns that advanced AI products from companies such as Anthropic could unleash devastating cyberattacks and wreak other havoc if they fell into the wrong hands. It called for creating a voluntary oversight system in which developers of advanced AI models could submit their products to a review by federal agencies as much as 90 days before releasing them, POLITICO previously reported.

Among other details, the seven-page draft emphasizes that the government AI reviews would be voluntary: “Nothing in this section shall be construed to authorize the creation of a mandatory governmental licensing, preclearance, or permitting requirement for the development, publication, release, or distribution of new AI models, including frontier models.”

Despite such assurances, former Trump AI czar David Sacks raised concerns that the voluntary reviews may one day become mandatory, a senior White House official told POLITICO on Thursday.

The draft also includes language aimed at bad actors. It directs the attorney general to enforce the Computer Fraud and Abuse Act and “other applicable Federal criminal laws against anyone who utilizes AI to illegally access or damage a computer without authorization, or who utilizes AI while engaged in such illegal access to further any other crime.”

Administration officials had briefed major tech companies about the order’s contents this week, and top AI industry executives had been invited to attend a Thursday signing ceremony at the White House.

But Trump told reporters he hit the brakes.

“I didn’t like certain aspects of it,” the president said, adding that he worried the order might slow U.S. efforts to beat China in the race to dominate AI.

The administration has not said what changes might be made in the order or when the signing might be rescheduled.

Jacob Wendler contributed to this report.

This story originally ran in POLITICO and appears on Business Insider through the Axel Springer Global Reporters Network. The network publishes major stories from the Axel Springer network of publications, a worldwide group of news outlets that includes Business Insider.

• I often praised my children to others instead of to them directly.
• My upbringing made it hard for me to express encouragement openly.
• A painful conversation with my son changed how I parent adult kids.

Several years ago, while driving behind a car with a “my-child-is-an-honor-student” bumper sticker, I said to my oldest son, sitting in the passenger seat, “I always wanted one of those.”

He, then a college student, replied, “Why? It doesn’t mean anything.”

He was right. In the greater scheme of things, achieving honor roll in elementary or middle school is not a significant accomplishment. Nor is it a predictor of future success. Even so, I still wanted one!

None of my five children was an academic superstar. They rarely achieved honor roll for more than one quarter of any school year, and none was named to the Dean’s List in college. Nevertheless, I’ve always been exceedingly proud of each one. In fact, I’m constantly singing their praises to anyone who’ll listen.

The problem is, I rarely commend them directly.

My parents did not praise me

Maybe that’s because my parents were not generous with praise. Their generation was not hardwired for affirmation, so I did not learn from experience how formative praise is.

I was a well-behaved kid, a decent student, and a pretty compliant daughter. I didn’t need positive reinforcement to motivate me, although it would have been nice to receive some occasionally.

Growing up in the mid-20^th century, the expectation for most girls like me was to earn an MRS, not an MBA. So, when in my senior year of high school, I was accepted into all five colleges I applied to, my parents were not over the moon with excitement.

The day the fifth acceptance letter arrived from my first-choice school, I couldn’t wait to share the news with my dad. I’d hoped he’d be as happy as I was. If he was, he didn’t show it, and to this day, I still feel disappointed that he didn’t give me a big hug and tell me he was proud.

It shouldn’t be so hard to say ‘well done’

I was effusive with praise when my kids were small. We celebrated each milestone from learning to use the toilet to tying their shoes to riding a bike. But as they’ve grown, I’ve been a much quieter cheerleader.

The year my third son’s Little League team won the championship I consoled him when he struck out but did not high-five him for hitting the line drive that clinched the series. When another son sang a solo during a school concert that was so beautiful it silenced the audience, I was too stunned to tell him he’d done an amazing job.

Now that they’re adults, each of my children is achieving great things. One’s an artist in high demand. Another’s a photographer whose work is published internationally. My youngest son, a UX designer, was recruited by a top tech company halfway through his junior year of college. My second son, who works in finance, created a unique investment vehicle that has launched his career into the stratosphere.

Each of their successes is extraordinary, which is all the more reason I should tell them I’m proud.

My kids want to know I’m proud of them

Of course, I’m more than willing to tell friends, colleagues, and even mere acquaintances about all my kids accomplish. I post to Zoom chats and populate Slack channels with proud mama moments all the time. I share links to the Google alerts I’ve set up and forward their Reels from Instagram. I’m constantly sending photos in group chats, but I rarely send them texts to say how thrilled I am for them.

I’m trying to figure out why I’m so reluctant. Maybe it’s because I’m overwhelmed by their success. Where did the talent come from? Certainly not from me. Regardless, as their mother, I should congratulate them for all they’re doing.

I didn’t realize just how important that is until my third son confronted me with an email I’d written years before about a photo essay he’d published. Instead of complimenting his work, I critiqued the composition. He was devastated by my comments. He’d worked hard on the project and had hoped I would recognize its value. Instead, I wrote about its flaws.

When he read my words back to me, I was shocked. Not only did I not remember writing them, but I also had a hard time figuring out why I was so negative. I was ashamed I’d hurt him. At that moment, I realized no matter their age, my kids want my praise. Since then, I’ve been working really hard to tell each one just how proud of them I truly am.

They’re extraordinary people, and they should hear that often from their mother.

• The newly public SpaceX S-1 reveals how closely Elon Musk’s companies are connected.
• Last year, SpaceX was involved in more than $660 million worth of payments, goods, and services with the ventures.
• Here’s a look at how SpaceX is intertwined with Tesla, The Boring Company, and more.

Step right up to Elon Musk’s financial merry-go-round.

Tucked more than 200 pages into SpaceX’s S-1 paperwork, which the company filed on Wednesday, is an outline of how interconnected Musk’s various companies are, including through more than $660 million in payments, goods, and services involving SpaceX and his other ventures last year.

Musk has his hands in many pots. In addition to being the CEO of aerospace company SpaceX, he’s the CEO (and “Technoking”) of electric carmaker Tesla, the founder of tunneling business The Boring Company, the cofounder of brain chip firm Neuralink, and was the CEO of xAI, until it merged with SpaceX in February. In various ways, the companies are all intermingled.

SpaceX said in the filing that there may be “conflicts of interest,” but ultimately, they benefit investors.

It’s not uncommon for companies with certain ties to do business with one another and to spell out these relationships in a prospectus filing when they plan to go public. The breakdown in SpaceX’s S-1 is the first look we’re getting at some of its connections, including SpaceX’s deals with The Boring Company or its purchase of Tesla Cybertrucks.

The biggest expenses between the companies fell under the banner of “commercial, licensing, and support.”

Last year, SpaceX paid Tesla $144 million under such agreements, a figure significantly higher than in years past. xAI, then a separate entity, spent more, paying Tesla $506 million last year. xAI, then a separate entity, spent more, paying Tesla $506 million last year, while also bringing in $2 millon in revenue from Tesla.

The majority of SpaceX’s cumulative $650 million in spending with Tesla was for Megapack products, Tesla’s battery storage system. SpaceX also bought $131 million worth of Cybertrucks, which, at a starting retail price of $69,990 a pop, would be as many as 1,871 vehicles.

Additionally, Tesla paid $4 million last year to advertise on X.

Some expenses were driven by pure practicality: Tesla paid SpaceX $2 million to use its aircraft, X leased office space from The Boring Company for $1 million, and xAI rented space from the billionaire’s umbrella company, Musk Industries LLC, for $2 million last year. SpaceX also spent $4 million on a security company owned by Musk for his personal security, as Tesla has done, per its filings.

Other expenses were mind-scratchers. SpaceX paid The Boring Company $1 million in connection with the construction of tunnels in Bastrop, Texas. These could be the tunnels connecting his facilities reported by local outlets, or they could be related to the chip facility SpaceX is building there.

Tesla and SpaceX’s relationship is more than transactional

Musk’s companies plan to continue doing business together, particularly Tesla and SpaceX, which, the company said, have a “strong and constructive partnership.”

Tesla owns nearly 19 million shares of SpaceX stock. While that represents less than 1% of the company, at a target valuation of $1.5 trillion, those shares would be worth about $4.1 billion.

SpaceX and Tesla also have major projects in the works. The pair is developing Macrohard, an agentic AI platform, and, along with Intel, has partnered on Terafab, a manufacturing initiative that creates chips for Tesla’s robots and vehicles, as well as SpaceX’s orbital compute infrastructure.

The projects are set to be the beginning of a long relationship.

“We plan to explore other areas of strategic collaboration with Tesla in the future,” the document says.

• Mark Zuckerberg’s email struck an empathetic tone. He also said he didn’t expect more companywide layoffs in 2026.
• Layoff anxiety can hurt worker productivity and morale, thereby carrying a real business cost.
• Workplace observers say his focus on stability suggests he recognizes the impact of prolonged uncertainty.

Mark Zuckerberg is signaling that Meta employees can stop looking over their shoulders.

After long emphasizing cost-cutting, management flattening, and “Year of Efficiency” rhetoric, the Meta chief struck an empathetic tone in his post-layoff email to employees on Wednesday — emphasizing stability, conceding communication failures, and promising to “do right by people along the way.”

In his internal email to staffers, he thanked the roughly 8,000 workers who were being let go and emphasized his desire to provide “as much stability as possible” to those who remained.

It was a reminder that layoff anxiety carries a real business cost.

To that point, Zuckerberg said that he doesn’t expect further companywide layoffs in 2026.

While that doesn’t rule out smaller-scale cuts, the message followed weeks of grueling uncertainty for staffers waiting to learn whether they still had jobs.

Zuckerberg’s email — a shift away from the more hard-charging tone he adopted post-pandemic — suggested he recognizes that prolonged uncertainty can weigh on employees and, ultimately, the company itself, workplace observers told Business Insider.

“You do need to try to create some psychological safety for people who are there, because layoffs are extremely distracting,” said Amii Barnard-Bahn, a C-suite coach and consultant.

‘We won’t always get this balance right’

Wednesday’s cuts were the latest challenge for a workforce that has spent years navigating repeated rounds of layoffs, heightened performance scrutiny, and persistent questions about whether AI would take their jobs.

It’s a theme that has played out across tech, as companies increasingly tie cuts to AI and leaders warn about a white-collar bloodbath.

In 2025, the CEO told staffers in an all-hands meeting to “buckle up” for an “intense” year ahead. Some of Meta’s layoffs have come with an added sting: Last year, the company also said it was cutting some 4,000 workers who had failed to meet expectations.

By the time the latest round arrived, the accumulation of uncertainty had drained some employees and left them wishing they were let go.

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

Zuckerberg’s Wednesday message hit on the toll that uncertainty around staffing levels can take: “We won’t always get this balance right, but I care deeply about this so we’ll keep adjusting and work hard to do right by people along the way,” he wrote.

It’s not clear how effective Zuckerberg’s softer tone might be, though he had little choice but to try to reassure those left standing, said Pav Stojkovic, an HR consultant and former chief people officer at several companies, including The Athletic.

Zuckerberg’s approach is a departure from one he’d used previously. In 2022, for example, Zuckerberg told Meta staff he was upping performance goals to get rid of employees who “shouldn’t be here.”

By “turning up the heat a little bit,” Zuckerberg said at the time that he hoped some workers would “decide that this place isn’t for you, and that self-selection is OK with me.”

Last year, Meta directed managers to place a higher proportion of employees in its bottom review rankings. Zuckerberg has a long-standing history of ratcheting up the pressure at Meta, reinforcing a blunt, survival-of-the-fittest culture at the social media giant.

The billionaire CEO is far from alone in embracing a sink-or-swim philosophy as AI reshapes the workplace.

A focus on execution

Zuckerberg’s note comes at a transitional time for the industry. Excitement over the possibility of AI has mixed with fears over efficiency-driven job cuts and the encroachment of automation on workers’ livelihoods.

As Meta reshuffles roughly 7,000 employees to focus on new AI initiatives, Zuckerberg needs a workforce concentrated on execution amid the AI arms race.

“Success isn’t a given. AI is the most consequential technology of our lifetimes. The companies that lead the way will define the next generation,” he wrote.

Barnard-Bahn said it’s likely that productivity at the company took a big hit in the last month, as workers worried about whether they or their colleagues would be cut or reorganized.

By providing workers with a higher degree of job security for the next six-plus months, Zuckerberg might be offering employees something that Big Tech competitors have not.

“Meta has the talent, the infrastructure, the apps and distribution, and the business model,” Zuckerberg wrote. “We have a lot of work ahead, but what’s on the other side is going to be extraordinary.”

• Steve Wozniak gave a commencement speech at Grand Valley State University earlier this month.
• He was cheered after telling students they had AI, or “actual intelligence.”
• Students have booed some other execs who championed AI during their graduation speeches.

Somehow, Steve Wozniak did what other college graduation commencement speakers couldn’t this year: get applause when talking about AI.

The Apple cofounder took the stage during Grand Valley State University’s graduation ceremony earlier this month. During his speech, Wozniak offered reassurance to new graduates who are entering the workforce at the height of the AI revolution.

“You have AI — actual intelligence,” Wozniak said.

The remark garnered laughs and applause from the audience.

“It would take too long to go deeply into what I think about AI, but we’ve been trying to create a brain,” Wozniak said. “Is there a way we can duplicate a routine a trillion times and have it work like a brain? AI is one of those attempts.”

While Wozniak delivered his speech without interruption, the same can’t be said of some other AI-forward commencement speakers. In the weeks that followed, former Google CEO Eric Schmidt and real estate executive Gloria Caulfield were both booed for their comments about AI at two separate graduate ceremonies.

AI is looming over new graduates as they enter the job market. The tech is changing the landscape, from the skills candidates need to how companies assess them. Its ability to automate many tasks has led some companies to conduct AI-related layoffs.

During his commencement address, Wozniak reflected on working at Apple and offered students some advice as they begin their careers.

“You should always try to think different,” he said. “Don’t follow the same steps as a million other people. Think, is there something I can do a little different?”