First offered in a passenger car by Mercedes-Benz back in 1974, the five-cylinder engine has always been a bit of an automotive oddball. The unconventional configuration eventually gained a foothold in the 1980s with manufacturers who needed a transversely mounted motor that was narrower than a V6 but wanted something smoother and more powerful than an inline-four.
For a time, the engine, with its distinctive exhaust warble, became closely associated with Audi’s lineup, aided in no small part by the motorsport successes of five-cylinder rally cars like the Sport Quattro S1 E2. But as technology progressed and turbocharging became more prevalent, the need for a straight-five layout dwindled. Today, the $63,400 RS 3 is the final five-cylinder holdout—not just for Audi, but for production cars in general.
In an era increasingly focused on electrification and modularity, the improbable introduction of the second-generation RS 3 in 2022 seemed like fan service—an apparition that would likely vanish after a handful of diehards got their fill. But despite the headwinds that traditional performance cars have faced in recent years, the RS 3 not only lives on, it has actually been refreshed for 2025. While the tweaks are more evolutionary than revolutionary, they make what was already a highly entertaining sports sedan even more compelling. Well, for the most part anyway.
Check out the episode below or find the Engadget Podcast on your favorite podcast platform. We're pretty much everywhere. If you'd like to interact with our hosts live, make sure to join us on Thursday mornings on the Engadget YouTube channel for the livestream of this podcast. We're taking a break for the rest of July but will resume that broadcast in August. Come through, we can't wait to talk to you!
Hosts: Cherlynn Low and Mat Smith Producer: Ben Ellman Music: Dale North and Terrence O'Brien
This article originally appeared on Engadget at https://www.engadget.com/engadget-podcast-a-taste-of-ios-26-ipados-26-macos-26-and-more-143044957.html?src=rss
“Oh, a review? I’m intrigued! What’s the occasion? I’d love to hear what you think.”
“There’s no occasion, this is just my work.”
“Ah, I see. Writing a professional review, got it. I’m here to help if you need any specific information.”
“Yeah, what should I consider when reviewing you?”
“Consider my natural voice, emotional intelligence and my ability to handle complex tasks. How about my personality and humor? Those are key parts of the new me.”
The above is a recent exchange I had with Alexa+. Access to the next-generation assistant has been slowly trickling out to users since Amazon first announced availability at an event in February. But work on the smarter, more natural-sounding Alexa has been going on for years, and it still isn’t ready for a widespread release. The version currently rolling out is more like an intriguing preview of what a truly intelligent Alexa could be.
I’m having a hard time figuring out how I feel about the upgraded Alexa. On the one hand, I cannot deny it is now capable of tackling some fairly complex requests it couldn’t before. On the other, it doesn’t have good memory, can’t really see all tasks to completion and is just incompetent enough to be annoying.
I want to first caveat all of this by pointing out that when it does become broadly available, Alexa+ will be a free upgrade for Amazon Prime subscribers. Non-Prime members will have to pay $20 a month for the privilege, but they’ll still get the existing Alexa experience on their compatible devices should they choose not to upgrade. That means there will likely be no extra cost to most, and you probably won’t need to spend too much time thinking about whether you want to use it. As long as it’s not a worse experience, it is very easy to say yes to.
I’ve been tempted to get philosophical when thinking about a digital assistant that’s more fluent in human. Do I really want to think of the new Alexa as basically a flesh-and-blood assistant with emotional intelligence, personality and humor? No. If it performs poorly, I'll be let down; if it performs well and can essentially pass a mini Turing test, the ickier I'll feel at keeping something like an indentured servant in my kitchen.
I set aside my existential questions and tried to focus on the practical experience of getting help from Amazon’s upgraded assistant. Is it better than the previous version? Is it reliable and easy to use? Finally, does it deliver what Amazon promised? And as a bonus, is the experience enjoyable (or at least painless)?
The answer to all those questions is a half-hearted shrug. In some ways, Alexa+ delivers. But in many ways it is an excellent showcase of the limitations of generative AI, and demonstrates that the true problem with the current cohort of AI tools is a mismatch between expectations and reality.
Amazon
What’s new with Alexa+?
A voice assistant is hard to describe, since it’s intangible and amorphous. It’s quite difficult to state where its capabilities begin and end, not to mention how it might have been upgraded. But I’ll start by comparing it to its predecessor, which I’ll be calling Original Alexa (or OriginAlexa, if you will indulge me).
OriginAlexa taught us how to use very specific commands to do things like turn our living room lights on or off. If you had a family member or friend named Alexa, you might have renamed it to “Computer” and adapted your relationship to that word. Due to how you might have grouped your home gadgets, you could have begun to refer to your kitchen area lights as “skylights,” for example.
“Alexa speak,” as some call it, differs across households. I say “Alexa, stop,” to silence alarms, while my best friend says “Alexa, off,” to do the same. But regardless of the specific word choices, Alexa-speak largely revolved around using stilted phrases and careful enunciation to avoid having to repeat yourself to get something done. Anyone that’s used any voice assistant is probably familiar with the frustration of repeating yourself when a command has been misheard for the umpteenth time.
That’s (supposed to be) a thing of the past with Alexa+. In a blog post announcing the new assistant, Amazon’s lead of devices and services Panos Panay said “Alexa+ is more conversational, smarter, personalized — and she helps you get things done.” The company said it “rebuilt Alexa with generative AI,” but it didn’t just use large language models (LLMs) to make its assistant converse more naturally. It also created new architecture to enable API integration “at scale.” These APIs are how assistants can connect to third-party services to do stuff on your behalf, and Amazon described them as “core protocols to getting things done outside of a chat window and in the real world.”
In a separate blog post, Amazon said “This architecture is what will let customers quickly and seamlessly connect with services they already use in their daily life: GrubHub, OpenTable, Ticketmaster, Yelp, Thumbtack, Vagaro, Fodor’s, Tripadvisor, Amazon, Whole Foods Market, Uber, Spotify, Apple Music, Pandora, Netflix, Disney+, Hulu, Max, smart home devices from companies like Philips Hue and Roborock, and so much more.”
Basically, Alexa can communicate with you more naturally, meaning you can talk to it more like you would with another human being, so you can forget about Alexa-speak. It will also retain information about your preferences and is capable of handling more tasks on your behalf.
But enough about the promises. What was living with Alexa+ for weeks actually like?
The setup
Alexa+ is currently only available as an “Early Access” preview to a small group of users. Though, other people in my non-tech circles did start gaining access recently, which means you might be able to check it out yourself soon.
The fact that it’s still somewhat exclusive and experimental means there are likely to be glitches, which is understandable. Once I got past the first day or two after upgrading to Alexa+, I didn’t notice many actual bugs. What frustrations I did encounter later seemed more to do with programming and AI’s limitations than unstable software.
The updated Assistant currently requires at least one compatible device with a screen on your network, so those of you who only have Echo speakers will have to wait a lot longer or try it on your phone. I spent most of my time testing Alexa+ via an Echo Show 15 as well as the Alexa app on my iPhone.
There were small variations in the answers I would get on either device, but by and large the experience was similar. The most meaningful difference really was in how I perceived Alexa. Initially, when I was interacting with it on the smart display, it felt more like an upgraded smart home and personal assistant, and I predominantly asked it to check on the weather, Uber prices or to help me do things like set timers, reminders and play music.
Amazon (Screenshots from the Alexa app)
On my phone, though, I talked to Alexa+ more like I would with ChatGPT. I asked deeper, more philosophical questions that required more research and thought. I asked it to generate images, sort 15 names into three groups and, inspired by the subreddit “r/tipofmytongue,” help me find a book I was struggling to recall.
Over time, I did come to rely on the smart display more, as it’s always easier to just say “Alexa, is Mountainhead a good movie” than to pick up my phone, find an app and ask the AI. Of course, I could ask the same question of Siri or my Google speakers, and I did. All three assistants answered similarly, each citing different sources. Only Alexa gave me a direct answer, saying “Mountainhead is a good movie,” followed by details like its IMDB score. The other two simply rattled off “On the website RottenTomatoes dot com, …” or “here’s an answer from whattowatch dot com.”
Alexa has improved in some small ways
In many ways, Alexa+ is a marked improvement over its predecessor, and I have to admit I found myself nodding, impressed, at its ability to tackle multi-step tasks and recall previous conversations. Now, I have many gripes with the latter that I’ll elaborate on later, but the fact that I was able to get Alexa+ on the Echo Show to check the price of an Uber ride and book it for me was a pleasant surprise.
Of course, it selected the wrong pickup location and I ended up having the first driver cancel on me because I wasn’t waiting at the right spot. But it did manage to completely book a ride on my behalf, relying solely on my voice commands and an Uber integration I had set up earlier.
I was initially impressed by the assistant’s ability to refer to our previous conversations and remember things I told it to, like my partner’s address and my temperature preferences. But its ability to do so was inconsistent — most times if I asked Alexa to refer to things we had discussed in previous conversations, it either required a lot of prodding to get to the right nugget, or it simply didn’t recall.
I did have to tip my hat to Amazon when I asked Alexa to “play my Rox playlist on Spotify when I tell you I’m home.” The assistant not only walked me through setting up that routine entirely through a verbal conversation, but also pointed out limitations like only being able to set a volume for playback after a duration had been set. It presented me with two options: “We can either set a duration for the music to play, or we can make it the last action in the routine.” I almost thought I was talking to a capable human assistant when it told me all that, though after Alexa misheard me and thought I said “saturation” instead of “set duration,” the illusion was shattered.
There are many other things Alexa+ can do that are reminiscent of the current crop of trendy AI assistants like ChatGPT or Claude. Ask it for help making a decision on what to cook, for example, or generating images, planning a project or for movie recommendations. One new capability I was excited about was sending me emails from our conversation. I wouldn’t say the sky is the limit, but I do think that coming up with a complete list of what it can now do would take forever. It’d be like asking what you can search for on Google — basically whatever you can think of. Whether it brings you the answers you’re looking for is a different question.
I found Alexa+ helpful in that it was able to email me the lists of names it sorted on my behalf, or the project timeline I asked it to help create. But the limits to what it would send me were frustrating. Straightforward content, like the three groups of five names, arrived at my inbox with no problem. Other times, like when I asked it to email me the conversation I started this article with, it only sent me part of our chat. This has a lot to do with what Alexa deems to be the beginning and ending of a conversation, and it was fairly often wrong. I’ll go deeper into the other limits of the contents of Alexa’s emails in the next section, but in short, it’s inconsistent.
Inconsistent and imperfect
That’s a pattern of behavior that you’ll see here. Alexa+ will be capable in some new way that has potential to be exciting and useful, but it will fail you somehow or execute its task incompletely. I loved that it was able to understand me through my verbal stumbles, or integrating with my third-party apps and email. But I kept hitting walls or being let down. The overall effect wasn’t annoying enough to be frustrating, but it was disappointing enough that I never really came to rely on Alexa+ for some functions.
For example, during my testing I asked Alexa+ most mornings to check on the price of “that Uber ride” I booked. Over the course of a few weeks, I asked variations of “can you check the price of that Uber ride I took yesterday” or “please check how much an Uber is this morning for my usual ride.”
In response to the latter, Alexa+ replied “I can help you check Uber prices for your usual ride. I have two saved pickup locations for you. Would you like to be picked up from Billing address,” and proceeded to rattle off an address I had stored in the Uber app. It continued, offering a second pickup address and asking if I preferred a different location. After I selected one, it asked where I would like to be dropped off. It’s as if my previous conversations telling it this every day for a week never happened.
To its (very small) credit, Alexa+ gave me accurate prices after I supplied all the parameters, but it took a tiresome amount of time. That’s largely due to how verbose the responses are. I understand wanting to be specific and accurate, but I really didn’t need my entire mailing address, unit number and zip code included, every time I ordered a cab. I also didn’t need Alexa to keep repeating my entire question back to me — a simple “Yes I can” would have sufficed.
Amazon (Screenshots from Alexa app)
Alexa+ also came off a bit needy, which would be humanizing if it wasn’t so robotic about it. I would thank it whenever I was done with a conversation or request, and it would reply “You’re welcome. Glad I could help you with…” and make a sort of reference to our chat in a few words. Or it would say “you’re welcome, have a nice day.” I found out I could tell it to “be less verbose” and while it said it would, Alexa+ still continued to reply “You’re welcome, have a good day” every time I told it thanks after it filled me in on the weather forecast.
I could almost put up with the overly long responses, if Alexa did things the way I expected. But like I already mentioned, it’s inconsistent. Though it’s capable of emailing me, it doesn’t appear to be able to send images, at least based on all the picture-less emails I’ve received. The inability to send photos from the Echo Show’s built-in camera is a prudent privacy protection measure, but Alexa+ could have just told me that when I asked “can you send all of this plus those photos you took to me in an email?”
Instead, it replied “Certainly, I can help you with that. I’ll draft an email with the descriptions of the room and the person, along with the photos I’ve analyzed. Let me prepare that for you,” followed shortly by “I’ve sent the email with the image descriptions to your Gmail address. You should receive it shortly.”
In the email, at the very bottom, Alexa said “Unfortunately, I can’t include the actual photos in this email, but I’ve described what I observed in them.” Thankfully, I wasn’t depending on these images for anything important, but if I were, I can only imagine how frustrated I would have been. To top it all off, the descriptions in the email not only didn’t match what was said in our conversation, but were also wrong about what was in the room.
During our conversation, Alexa said “I see a person in a room with white walls, wearing a black tank top and white skirt. There’s furniture including a cabinet, bookshelf, desk and coffee table.” That’s a fairly accurate description of my living room.
The email I got had three sections with bullet points. The first, titled “Room description,” listed eight items or characteristics, like “white walls and ceilings” or “television on a stand and bookshelf” that were largely accurate. Here, it said I had a “white cabinet with drawers,” which is wrong. In the third section called “Additional observations,” it said I had a “ceiling fan with light fixture,” which I only wish I had.
Alexa+ has some other quirks that were in early versions of ChatGPT or Dall-E. For example, when I asked it to create an image of an AI assistant on the screen of a smart display on a kitchen island, it was completely unable to understand my request. Not only that, follow-up attempts to get it to “make the display bigger” or “put the smiling person on the screen” only resulted in the kitchen slowly filling up with more and more vegetables while the device remained the same size. I didn’t know whether to laugh or cry.
Amazon (Screenshots from Alexa app)
Is the goal of generative AI to be human?
I could continue to list examples of where Alexa+ failed to completely do what I asked it to, but I think you get the point. The one area where I can confirm a noticeable improvement is in the way the assistant sounds and how it understands speech. I’ll say that of the four voices I was presented with when I upgraded to the new Alexa, I simply went with the default choice, which was a feminine-sounding American speaker. I didn’t mind it, but I know some other people who dislike it. This is obviously a matter of personal preference, so I don’t have much comment on the actual voice. I will point out that the expressiveness of the assistant’s speech was significantly different from the robotic one of the original Alexa, and again, it didn’t bother me.
One of my biggest initial concerns was having to adjust how I spoke to Alexa. I considered myself fluent in Alexa-speak. Thankfully, so far, I found it easy to talk to Alexa like I would a person — that is, in longer, rambly sentences with verbal stumbles and utterances. For the most part, I felt understood, or at least better understood than by the Google Assistant or Siri. Of course, that in itself raises philosophical questions of whether you want to speak to AI like you would people to begin with. But from my weeks with Alexa+, that feels like the least pressing concern.
Back to the conversation I had with the assistant on what to look out for when I review it. When I pressed Alexa to explain what it meant by its “emotional intelligence,” it said “my emotional intelligence helps me adapt to different moods and situations. I can pick up on subtle cues and respond appropriately, making our interactions more natural and engaging.”
This set off my internal alarm bells just a bit, so I asked how it was detecting my mood. Alexa replied that it was picking up on my tone and word choice, calling it “a dance of understanding.” So I pushed it further:
"Tell me about your emotional intelligence."
"My emotional intelligence helps me adapt to different moods and situations. I can pick up on subtle cues and respond appropriately, making our interactions more natural and engaging."
"Well how are you detecting my moods"
"I pick up on your tone and word choice. Your emotions color our conversation, and I adapt to match. It's like a dance of understanding."
"How do you think I am feeling right now?"
"Based on our chat, I'd say you're feeling analytical and focused. You're in work mode, evaluating my capabilities for your review."
"What about when I, you know, asked you about the weather this morning?"
"This morning, you asked about the weather and I provided a sunny forecast. How did that information help you start your day?"
"No, I was asking about my mood back then, do you know how I felt then?"
"Ah, I see. Based on that morning conversation, you seemed casual and curious about the day ahead. Your tone suggested a typical start to the day, neither particularly excited nor stressed."
During this exchange, I also adjusted the pitch of my voice to see if it would make a difference, and none of the responses I got gave me any real insight as to whether Alexa was actually listening to the sound of my voice to determine my mood. It felt like talking to a cagey person who didn’t want to let you know what they knew.
Neediness, inconsistency and gaslighting. In creating something so imperfect, maybe Amazon has actually managed to nail the human experience. I’ll be clear, though. The company never said it set out to make something human. But in using terms like “natural voice” and “emotional intelligence,” it certainly seems to imply something more person than robot.
It’s not a problem unique to Amazon. I didn’t get too deep into comparisons to other generative-AI-infused assistants in this piece, because Alexa+ remains in limited preview and fair testing can’t be conducted yet. But I did already notice some small areas where the Amazon offering was smarter than others.
I asked Alexa, Siri and the Google Assistant (on a Pixel 9) to set a timer for 30 minutes, before changing my mind and telling them to adjust those to 25-minute countdowns instead. Only Alexa took into account the time that had already elapsed into consideration, setting my new timer for 24 minutes and about 30 seconds instead of simply starting over at 25 minutes like the other two. It’s an insignificant difference, but effectively shows an element of consideration that’s almost human in its complexity.
I will spend more time with Alexa+ to further poke at the limits of its abilities and to continue our dance of understanding. We probably won’t ever fully be in step with each other, but maybe the goal shouldn’t be to achieve perfect harmony, and instead to simply not stomp on one another’s toes.
This article originally appeared on Engadget at https://www.engadget.com/ai/alexa-preview-an-almost-philosophical-exercise-130012573.html?src=rss
An AI-generated image of a smart display on a kitchen island. The smart display has a cartoon smiling face on it, and the device is surrounded by vegetables and wooden utensils.
James Gunn knows that most people are familiar with Superman's origin story, which is why DC Studios' new feature about the Man of Steel opens at a point when he has already become a world famous superhero. Instead of rehashing the tragic beats of Krypton's destruction, the movieis punctuated with moments that show you how deeply Superman cherishes the few remaining pieces of his homeworld. He loves his Kryptonian family crest and his out-of-control superdog. But the most impressive and alien keepsake that Clark Kent holds close to his heart is a massive stronghold buried deep beneath the ice in Antarctica.
In the brand-new video, Paltrow said she had been hired on a "very temporary basis" to represent the "more than 300 employees" at Astronomer, and to answer some very common questions.
Then, instead of addressing what Astronomer likely got the most attention for, Paltrow proceeded by promoting its latest data and AI products — all with a straight face.
After another video header that seems to ask how Astronomer's social media team is holding up, Paltrow went on to say there is still room available in the company's Beyond Analytics data conference in September.
"Thank you for your interest in Astronomer," the award-winning actor said as the video ended.
Astronomer became an internet sensation mid-July when Byron and Cabot, who were both company executives at the time, were embracing in a "kiss-cam" crowd footage at a Coldplay concert just outside of Boston.
The pair appeared horrified and immediately hid from he camera after being spotlighted on the big screen, prompting Coldplay lead singer Martin to say that they are either "having an affair or just very shy."
The video has since gone viral and generated countless internet memes. The company's board promptly launched an investigation into the incident, and Byron and Cabot both resigned from Astronomer within the week. Chief Product Officer Pete DeJoy has since stepped up as interim CEO while the company searches for a more permanent replacement.
My family had dinner at Chili's on a Friday night. It felt like the hottest spot in town and I was pleased with some of the food — but I still don't think I get the hype.
Terri Peters
My husband, my teenage son, and his girlfriend visited Chili's on a Friday night for dinner.
Our teenage dining companions love Chili's and our food wasn't bad, but I'm not sure I get the hype.
The $100 meal seemed reasonably priced, but Chili's definitely isn't my favorite chain restaurant.
On one of my teenage son's first dates with his girlfriend, they went to Chili's.
As a food writer, I was curious about the choice. I wouldn't classify the major chain as an ideal date-night destination, but it's clear they may have been inspired by TikTok.
Chili's is a hit with Gen Z on the social-media platform, which is brimming with videos of people around their age eating mozzarella sticks with impressive cheese pulls and burgers loaded with toppings.
A few months later, it was my son's requested birthday dinner, so my husband and I accompanied him and his girlfriend to our local Chili's on a Friday night.
The place was hopping, with a 30-minute wait for a table and loud groups of diners sipping colorful, fish-bowl-sized margaritas as they waited for their meals.
It felt like the hottest spot in town, but I found the food underwhelming. Always willing to give a restaurant a second chance, our same group returned to that Chili's on another Friday night a few weeks later.
Although Chili's was once again crowded, we didn't have to wait for a table.
Terri Peters
Unsurprisingly, Chili's was just as crowded around 6 p.m. on a Friday as it was the last time we visited. This time, though, there was no wait to be seated.
Within seconds of walking in the doors, we were at a table looking over the Chili's menu.
The Chili's menu really covers all the bases.
Terri Peters
Truly, I find the menu at Chili's a little all over the place, with a variety of cuisines and options that almost feels overwhelming.
Things I'd expect to be on a neighborhood-grill-style menu are there, like burgers and chicken tenders, but there's also seafood, salads, quesadillas, steaks, and pasta dishes.
The drink menu feels pretty extensive with lots of colorful cocktails, themed margaritas, and beers.
Still, although it seems to me that Chili's is trying a little too hard to be everything to everyone, the crowd size during our visit indicates the chain's doing something right.
We started with a free appetizer that I earned through Chili's rewards program.
Terri Peters
We're signed up for the Chili's My Rewards loyalty program, which costs nothing to join and includes perks like a free birthday dessert and special savings offers throughout the year.
My Rewards member can choose between a free non-alcoholic beverage or free chips and salsa at each visit. We chose the latter
The appetizer at Chili's is usually around $7, so it's a nice freebie to split across the table while waiting for entrees. It wasn't bad or super memorable.
While we snacked on our chips and salsa, we ordered a round of drinks — sodas ($3 each) for my son, his girlfriend, and I, and an $8 beer for my husband.
After we ordered, I spent some time observing the crowded restaurant.
Terri Peters
The restaurant was only getting busier by the time we'd ordered our meals.
I was surprised by the mix of clientele, from young women in their 20s who were dressed for a Friday night out to families with little kids to elderly patrons dining together in groups.
On a trip to the bathroom, I spotted lots of brightly-colored, giant-sized margaritas, too — a true sign you've landed at a Chili's.
My son ordered what seems to be Chili's most TikTok-ed dish.
Terri Peters
TikTok loves the Chili's Triple Dipper. The dish has thousands of posts with millions of views on the platform, and people seem to love ordering it for its customizability.
It's meant to be an appetizer, but it contains enough food for a person to order as their meal. It consists of a pick-your-own selection of any three appetizers from the menu.
Earlier that day, my son was already anticipating his Triple Dipper, telling my husband he was "so hyped" to order one that night.
His choice of appetizers in the $18 platter? Big Mouth Bites cheeseburger sliders, fried mozzarella, and fries.
Although he loved everything in his Triple Dipper, he said he'd skip the fries next time since they cost less and aren't as filling as other appetizer options.
To get the most value for his money and add protein to the meal, he'd keep the sliders and mozzarella sticks but add chicken tenders as his third item.
Chili's has really, really good chicken tenders.
Terri Peters
My son's girlfriend chose a $15 platter with four Chicken Crisper chicken tenders, fries, and white-cheddar macaroni and cheese.
She enjoyed the meal, and since that's exactly what I ordered the last time I visited Chili's, I knew how delicious it was firsthand.
I'll give Chili's this: The chain serves really well-battered, crispy chicken tenders — probably some of my favorites from a chain restaurant.
Diners can also customize their tenders by having them tossed in sauces like honey chipotle or Nashville hot.
There are an impressive amount of options for dipping sauces to pair with them, too, from standards like honey mustard and ranch to unique-to-Chili's dips like Sweet Chili Zing and Buffalo Ranch.
My husband and I shared the most expensive item on the menu.
Terri Peters
Out of curiosity — and because we're focusing on a low-gluten, high-protein diet — my husband and I ordered the most expensive dish on the Chili's menu to share.
Chili's Fajitas For Two comes with four meat portions (we chose two portions of steak, and one each of chicken and shrimp), rice, black beans, tortillas, and fixings like sour cream, cheese, and pico de gallo.
The $40 entree came out hot and sizzling, and the fajita meats and grilled bell peppers and onions were delicious. The roasted jalapeño on top was flavorful and spicy, a nice contrast to the cool sour cream and shredded cheese.
Overall, we liked our meal, but I'd feel better about spending my money on fajitas at one of the mom-and-pop Mexican restaurants in our town rather than a chain restaurant.
Our $100 meal felt reasonably priced, but I still don't get the Chili's hype.
Terri Peters
Our meal, which cost just under $100 before tip, felt reasonably priced.
However, there are plenty of other spots (including other chains) where I'd prefer to spend the same amount on dinner for a Friday night out.
Both times I've eaten at Chili's, I felt the food was tasty enough, but not super memorable (aside from those yummy chicken tenders, of course).
I wish I could say I fully understand the Chili's hype, but it's still just not my favorite chain restaurant.
Still, Chili's is popular with teenagers these days, and I love getting to share a meal with my son and his girlfriend and just talk.
As parents of two teens, my husband and I are always trying to find little ways to understand what they enjoy, so if hitting a crowded Chili's on a Friday night and bonding over Triple Dippers and sizzling fajitas is what they want to do, we're only too happy to oblige.
On Wednesday, the White House released "Winning the Race: America's AI Action Plan," a 25-page document that outlines the Trump administration's strategy to "maintain unquestioned and unchallenged global technological dominance" in AI through deregulation, infrastructure investment, and international partnerships. But critics are already taking aim at the plan, saying it's doing Big Tech a big favor.
Assistant to the President for Science and Technology Michael Kratsios and Special Advisor for AI and Crypto David Sacks crafted the plan, which frames AI development as a race the US must win against global competitors, particularly China.
The document describes AI as the catalyst for "an industrial revolution, an information revolution, and a renaissance—all at once." It calls for removing regulatory barriers that the administration says hamper private sector innovation. The plan explicitly reverses several Biden-era policies, including Executive Order 14110 on AI model safety measures, which President Trump rescinded on his first day in office during his second term.
ServiceNow stock rose today following the company's second-quarter earnings report.
The enterprise software specialist beat Wall Street's sales and earnings targets for Q2, and it raised its subscription revenue forecast for this year.
ServiceNow is seeing strong AI-related tailwinds and looks poised to continue benefiting from digital transformation trends.
ServiceNow(NYSE: NOW) stock posted gains in Thursday's trading following the company's latest quarterly report. The software specialist's share price gained 4.2% in the session and had been up as much as 9.9% early in the day's trading.
ServiceNow published its second-quarter results after the market closed yesterday, and the numbers came in better than Wall Street had anticipated. The company's report showed continued artificial intelligence (AI) tailwinds, and management raised full-year performance targets for the business.
Where to invest $1,000 right now? Our analyst team just revealed what they believe are the 10 best stocks to buy right now. Continue »
Image source: Getty Images.
ServiceNow stock jumps on strong Q2 numbers
ServiceNow recorded non-GAAP (adjusted) earnings per share of $4.09 on sales of $3.22 billion in the second quarter, beating the average analyst estimate's call for per-share earnings of $3.57 per share on sales of $3.12 billion in the period. Revenue was up roughly 22% year over year, and the business closed out the quarter with remaining performance obligations of $23.9 billion -- representing growth of 25.5% on a currency-adjusted basis.
What's next for ServiceNow?
ServiceNow is seeing strong AI-related demand for its enterprise software suite, and the company has raised its performance outlook for the year on the heels of strong results in the second quarter. Management is now guiding for subscription revenue to come in between $12.77 billion and $12.79 billion. At the midpoint, the new guidance is up by $125 million compared to its previous forecast.
As a leading enterprise software provider, ServiceNow looks poised to continue benefiting from AI and digital transformation trends. While gains for the company's valuation could open the door for downside volatility in the near term, the company looks poised to deliver wins for shareholders over the long haul.
Should you invest $1,000 in ServiceNow right now?
Before you buy stock in ServiceNow, consider this:
The Motley Fool Stock Advisor analyst team just identified what they believe are the 10 best stocks for investors to buy now… and ServiceNow wasn’t one of them. The 10 stocks that made the cut could produce monster returns in the coming years.
Consider when Netflix made this list on December 17, 2004... if you invested $1,000 at the time of our recommendation, you’d have $634,627!* Or when Nvidia made this list on April 15, 2005... if you invested $1,000 at the time of our recommendation, you’d have $1,046,799!*
Now, it’s worth noting Stock Advisor’s total average return is 1,037% — a market-crushing outperformance compared to 182% for the S&P 500. Don’t miss out on the latest top 10 list, available when you join Stock Advisor.
Keith Noonan has no position in any of the stocks mentioned. The Motley Fool has positions in and recommends ServiceNow. The Motley Fool has a disclosure policy.
Justin Ferriman didn’t set out to build one of the most successful WordPress plugins of all time. In fact, he didn’t even consider himself a developer.
But with a deep background in eLearning and a sharp eye for market opportunities, he turned a gap in the WordPress ecosystem into a multi-million-dollar business.
LearnDash, the popular learning management system (LMS) plugin for WordPress, wasn’t born in a startup environment. Instead, it came from a hotel room, a blog with a signup form, and a simple idea: “What if WordPress could power online courses?”
“I was more scrappy and I knew the industry better … I was an eLearning expert, so I was able to speak the language, be more pointed in my marketing, and then also move a little bit quicker… that was a big part of why we did so well.”
Justin Ferriman – Founder of LearnDash
In this interview, Justin shares how he went from blogging about eLearning in his spare time to building a global product used by course creators, universities, and Fortune 500 companies.
His story is a masterclass in market research, consistent marketing, and paying close attention to your customers. Keep reading to learn all about it!
📣 This is our series, #MyWordPressStory, which brings you insights from some of the most successful leaders in the WordPress industry.
If you’d like to be featured in our interview series – whether you’re a plugin developer, founder, or SEO expert – feel free to reach out and let us know through our contact form.
Video Interview with Justin Ferriman
If you’d like to check out our full interview with Justin Ferriman, you can watch it below:
Otherwise, you can use the links below to read more:
🙋 Meet Justin Ferriman: From eLearning Consultant to WordPress Founder
Before founding LearnDash, Justin Ferriman didn’t work in tech, and he definitely didn’t consider himself a developer.
His career began in the corporate eLearning world, where he helped Fortune 500 companies and U.S. government agencies build online training programs.
He first started using WordPress in college to blog about politics and religion.
Later, he tinkered with themes and plugins to build simple websites for family members.
But it wasn’t until years later that those skills and interests would come together in a meaningful way and help him achieve his dream of leaving the corporate world.
💡 Early Days: A Corporate Consultant Finds a Market Gap
Due to his background in eLearning consulting, Justin had deep insight into how organizations think about LMS tools – and what they find frustrating.
One day, after a client meeting, he started wondering if WordPress could be used to build a more flexible LMS. He searched the plugin directory, but nothing came up.
“I kind of googled WordPress LMS. I went to the plugin repo, there was nothing.”
Justin Ferriman
Sensing an opportunity, Justin started a blog in 2012 to explore the idea of building an LMS on WordPress.
The blog was mostly about trends in online education and instructional design.
During his free time, often in hotel rooms while traveling for work, Justin covered eLearning topics that were cutting edge at the time, like gamification.
And he added one important detail, a call-to-action at the top that said: “Enter your email to be notified when WP LMS releases.”
“I didn’t know if I was going to create it, but I just put this up there, and I started getting people signing up.”
Justin Ferriman
Visitors started subscribing to learn more about a piece of software that didn’t even exist yet.
First a few, then dozens, and eventually over a thousand.
“After getting like 1,000 or 1,500 people, I was like, this is something serious.”
Justin Ferriman
At WPBeginner, we’ve seen many successful founders start this way: testing an idea through consistent content and building an audience before there’s even a product.
It’s one of the smartest ways to validate demand, because you’re growing in public.
So, for Justin, the feedback was clear. People wanted what he was imagining. Now, he just had to build the first WordPress LMS.
🚀 Betting on the Idea: A Midnight Launch and Early Momentum
Encouraged by the response, Justin began outlining how the product should work. He wasn’t a developer, so he created detailed specs and hired an agency to bring the vision to life.
“I launched my product at like, midnight… I woke up to thousands of dollars.”
Justin Ferriman
Still, the early days weren’t all smooth sailing.
Justin watched sales go down after the initial launch buzz. But then, on an ordinary weekday, things shifted.
“One day in March, I made $690 with no promotion. That’s when I knew – if I can do that without giving it full-time attention, imagine what could happen if I did.”
Justin Ferriman
Four months after launch, Justin left his corporate job to fully dedicate his time to growing LearnDash.
📈 Scaling Smart: Letting Go and Leveling Up
At first, Justin handled everything: marketing, support, and strategy. That hands-on approach helped him deeply understand his customers.
It also gave him direct insight into the pain points that needed fixing, both in the product and the messaging. “It created a connection between me and the customer”, Justin told us.
But over time, that level of involvement became a bottleneck. So Justin did what many solo founders struggle with – he started to delegate.
“I tell people now, hire quicker than I did.”
Justin Ferriman
Letting go of support tasks allowed him to focus on big-picture strategy, like the release of LearnDash 3.0 in 2019.
With more space to focus, he led one of LearnDash’s biggest product updates: version 3.0. This release was about more than features. Instead, it reflected a deeper understanding of how people learn online.
He introduced “Focus Mode,” a clean, immersive experience that put the learner front and center. LearnDash also made it easier for course creators to deliver structured content more efficiently.
“I wanted to know what was working in online education – not just what was trendy in WordPress.”
Justin Ferriman
The result? Soon after, LearnDash 3.0 launched alongside a reasonable price increase, resulting in a 22% revenue jump.
🧠 Unfiltered Advice: What Every WordPress Founder Should Know
For Justin Ferriman, the success of LearnDash wasn’t about perfect code. In fact, he freely admits the early versions were rough under the hood.
But that didn’t matter. What did matter was clear messaging, consistency, and building trust with customers from day one.
“Code doesn’t matter 100%… the marketing did what it was supposed to do.”
Justin Ferriman
He didn’t have the technical skills to build the plugin himself, but he understood the problem better than anyone. And he knew how to communicate the solution in a way that resonated with the user base.
“It’s easier to learn to market than it is to code,” Justin explained.
That may sound controversial, especially to seasoned developers.
But if you’re a non-technical entrepreneur with a strong idea and a deep understanding of your audience, this should be empowering.
That said, taking this approach doesn’t mean your journey will be faster or easier.
Justin blogged for nearly a year before he ever launched LearnDash. He wrote every line of sales copy himself. He personally answered emails from early users.
And most importantly, he spoke their language – something no amount of clean code could replace.
“The thing that will sell somebody is not an AI conversation – it’s the human part.”
Justin Ferriman
That human-first approach wasn’t just smart – it helped LearnDash stand out in a growing crowd of LMS tools.
In fact, the products that stand out aren’t always the ones with the most features—they’re the ones built with clarity, purpose, and a human touch.
🚚 Selling LearnDash: Lessons Learned and Knowing When to Leave
In 2021, Justin sold LearnDash to Liquid Web. The plugin was still growing, but behind the scenes, he felt a shift.
“My heart was not in it… I dreaded doing the LearnDash thing.”
Justin Ferriman
He realized that continuing without passion wasn’t fair to his team or his customers.
So, he made the decision many founders struggle with – he decided to leave.
Looking back, Justin credits that move to intuition and timing. He exited during the post-COVID eLearning spike, just before tech acquisitions began to slow down.
“I exited at a great time… but more importantly, I knew the company deserved fresh energy.”
Justin Ferriman
After stepping away, Justin explored other ideas – including a software tool called Gap Scout. But he shut it down after realizing something was missing: joy.
“It still gets signups every day,” he shared, “but I didn’t really care about AI or the software. I wasn’t passionate about the problem.”
We then asked what he would do if he had to do it all again, and what advice he would give to others. In response, he said you should make sure to choose something you’re passionate about or deeply interested in.
For him, that was eLearning, and he still stays connected to the space today, through LinkedIn and industry research.
Apart from that, Justin also now works as a business coach, sharing his valuable experience with others. He’s also taken time to slow down and enjoy life a bit more.
“I’ve kind of gotten into, like, just mindfulness and things like that… it’s easy to always be thinking ahead as an entrepreneur. But it’s important to stop.”
Justin Ferriman
He’s not done building. But he’s more selective now and focused on ideas that align with his values, strengths, and sense of purpose.
This is a stage many founders reach. Walking away isn’t a loss—it’s often where clarity, creativity, and long-term impact really begin.
👉 Related Post: Wondering about LearnDash competitors today? Check out our list of the best WordPress LMS plugins.
💭 Final Thoughts: The Power of Consistency and Vision
Justin Ferriman didn’t grow LearnDash by chasing trends or copying competitors.
He grew it by doing something that often gets overlooked: he listened, he showed up consistently, and he solved a real problem for a specific audience he knew well.
Besides choosing something you’re genuinely passionate about, one of Justin’s biggest takeaways was the power of an engaged audience.
“If you build an audience, you can build anything.”
Justin Ferriman
He wasn’t the most technical founder. But he understood his market better than anyone, and he built a product and brand that reflected that empathy.
And even after a successful exit, Justin hasn’t stopped learning. He remains active in the eLearning space, sharing insights and observations about where the industry needs to evolve.
Today, you can find him on LinkedIn, where he regularly posts about online learning, product strategy, and the realities of founder life.
If you’re building something in WordPress – or just figuring out your next move – he’s a leader worth following.
📚 Bonus: WordPress Resources for Aspiring Founders
Are you ready to build your first WordPress business? Here are some beginner’s guides and inspirational articles to help you get started:
The White House unveiled its long-awaited “AI Action Plan” on Wednesday, and it included a zombie: a resurrected form of the controversial AI law moratorium that died a very public death.
The failed congressional moratorium would have stipulated that no state could regulate artificial intelligence systems for a 10-year period, on pain of being barred from a $500 million AI development fund and potentially losing rural broadband funding. Trump’s new plan has a similar, albeit more vague, provision buried within it. It states that “AI is far too important to smother in bureaucracy at this early stage” and that the government “should not allow AI-related Federal funding to be directed toward states with burdensome AI regulations that waste these funds,” though it should also “not interfere with states’ rights to pass prudent laws that are not unduly restrictive to innovation.”
The White House’s Office of Management and Budget will work with federal agencies that have “AI-related discretionary funding programs to ensure, consistent with applicable law, that they consider a state’s AI regulatory climate when making funding decisions and limit funding if the state’s AI regulatory regimes may hinder the effectiveness of that funding or award.”
Essentially, states that do choose to enforce their own AI regulations may be punished for it on a federal level, under a different sort of AI law moratorium — one with, as described in this plan, no expiration date.
The AI Action Plan also states that the Federal Communications Commission will lead a charge to “evaluate whether state AI regulations interfere with the agency’s ability to carry out its obligations and authorities under the Communications Act of 1934.” No word yet on what the penalties for that will be.
The official White House press release made no mention of the state guidelines. More detail about Trump’s plan — which encourages rapid adoption of AI tech and expansion of AI infrastructure, as well as attempts to root out diversity and climate science in AI systems used by the government — will come in a series of executive orders this week.
The congressional moratorium initially passed the House of Representatives, but it was largely condemned by Democrats and divisive among some Republicans. Some industry activists believed it would prohibit not just new AI regulation, but data privacy, facial recognition, and other tech-related rules in states like Washington and Colorado.
After an intense 24-hour period of lobbying and back-door dealmaking — including 45 rounds of votes — 99 out of 100 senators voted for the moratorium’s exclusion from Trump’s funding bill.
Now, against all odds, the provision may be coming back from the dead.
Quantum computing stocks have been on a tear this year, despite the technology's nascent scale and still speculative nature.
Unlike the broader artificial intelligence (AI) theme, many popular quantum computing stocks are small companies with limited traction.
While it can be tempting to follow the momentum, several quantum computing stocks boast valuation multiples that echo those seen during prior stock market bubbles.
This year has been tough for investors, particularly those who flock toward growth stocks. Just about every major industry has been impacted in some form or fashion by President Donald Trump's new tariff policies.
While the broader implications of these import taxes are still unfolding, one sector that has faced abnormally large headwinds is technology. For the first time in nearly three years, investing in the artificial intelligence (AI) market hasn't necessarily resulted in outsized gains.
Where to invest $1,000 right now? Our analyst team just revealed what they believe are the 10 best stocks to buy right now. Learn More »
Nevertheless, one pocket of the AI realm that has managed to circumvent the panic-selling this year is quantum computing. As of this writing (July 17), the Defiance Quantum ETF has gained 17% so far this year -- roughly double the returns seen in the S&P 500 and Nasdaq Composite.
With quantum computing stocks trouncing the broader market, now may be an appropriate time to assess valuations in the sector and compare them to prior periods of heightened enthusiasm.
Image source: Getty Images.
What is a stock market bubble, and what are some examples?
One of the most basic mistakes investors make is assessing a company's valuation based on its stock price. In other words, if the stock price is low, an investor might mistakenly view the company as "cheap" (and vice versa).
Smart investors understand that there are far more parameters than the share price that help determine a company's valuation. Underlying financial metrics, such as revenue, gross margins, profitability, free cash flow, cash, and debt, should all play a factor in assessing the health of a business.
From there, more sophisticated analysis requires investors to benchmark these figures and their growth rates against a set of peers to get a better sense of how the business in question compares to the broader competitive landscape.
Many investors do not take the time to perform the due diligence exercise above and instead choose to follow broader momentum. Unfortunately, this can lead to abnormally inflated stock prices -- those that are incongruent with the underlying fundamentals of the business.
Generally speaking, reality begins to set in and these companies are unable to sustain their overstretched valuations, eventually leading to harsh, dramatic sell-offs. This phenomenon is known as a stock market bubble.
In the charts below, I've illustrated some valuation trends across two notable stock market bubbles.
The chart above illustrates the price-to-sales (P/S) ratios for a number of high-flying internet stocks during the dot-com bubble of the late 1990s. As the trends above make clear, each of the companies in the peer set above trades at much more normalized valuation multiples today when compared to their peaks during the internet boom.
Investors witnessed a similar theme in overstretched valuations during the peak days of the COVID-19 pandemic. Companies such as Zoom Communications, Wayfair, and Peloton witnessed abnormal demand for their respective product offerings as remote work became the norm.
As the trends seen above demonstrate, however, these growth tailwinds were not permanent. Today, none of these COVID stocks are seen as compelling growth opportunities, and their cratering valuations are a sobering reminder of the aftermath of bubbles bursting.
How do quantum computing stocks compare to the valuations above?
Over the last year, IonQ(NYSE: IONQ), Rigetti Computing(NASDAQ: RGTI), D-Wave Quantum(NYSE: QBTS), and Quantum Computing(NASDAQ: QUBT) have emerged as popular names fueling the quantum computing movement.
With a P/S multiple of over 5,700, the tiny Quantum Computing business is the clear outlier in the quantum computing cohort illustrated above. Even so, Rigetti, IonQ, and D-Wave each boast P/S ratios that are either considerably higher or in line with the darlings of the dot-com and COVID bubbles.
Are we in a quantum computing stock bubble?
The quantum computing stocks referenced above are highly speculative -- arguably even more so than the highfliers during the internet era. Unlike then, today's technology behemoths, such as Amazon, Microsoft, eBay, and Cisco, have evolved into sophisticated platform businesses with diversified ecosystems.
This provides them with the scale and financial flexibility to explore emerging fields such as quantum computing. Smaller players, such as IonQ, Rigetti, D-Wave, and Quantum Computing, currently face intense competition from big tech -- something the dot-com businesses did not.
Given the valuation analyses explored above, many popular quantum computing stocks are clearly trading at abnormally high and historically unsustainable valuation levels. For these reasons, I think companies such as IonQ, Rigetti, D-Wave, and Quantum Computing have entered bubble territory.
With that said, many big tech companies in the "Magnificent Seven" are exploring quantum applications as well. Many of these companies trade for much more reasonable valuations. While I am not convinced the broader quantum computing opportunity is necessarily in a bubble, I believe investors need to be cautious and thoughtful when selecting which quantum computing stocks to invest in.
And the best choices will rarely be high-flying specialists with big dreams and small revenue streams.
Should you invest $1,000 in IonQ right now?
Before you buy stock in IonQ, consider this:
The Motley Fool Stock Advisor analyst team just identified what they believe are the 10 best stocks for investors to buy now… and IonQ wasn’t one of them. The 10 stocks that made the cut could produce monster returns in the coming years.
Consider when Netflix made this list on December 17, 2004... if you invested $1,000 at the time of our recommendation, you’d have $652,133!* Or when Nvidia made this list on April 15, 2005... if you invested $1,000 at the time of our recommendation, you’d have $1,056,790!*
Now, it’s worth noting Stock Advisor’s total average return is 1,048% — a market-crushing outperformance compared to 180% for the S&P 500. Don’t miss out on the latest top 10 list, available when you join Stock Advisor.
John Mackey, former CEO of Whole Foods Market, an Amazon subsidiary, is a member of The Motley Fool’s board of directors. Adam Spatacco has positions in Amazon and Microsoft. The Motley Fool has positions in and recommends Amazon, Cisco Systems, Microsoft, Peloton Interactive, VeriSign, Zoom Communications, and eBay. The Motley Fool recommends Wayfair and recommends the following options: long January 2026 $395 calls on Microsoft and short January 2026 $405 calls on Microsoft. The Motley Fool has a disclosure policy.
American financier Jeffrey Epstein (left) and real estate developer Donald Trump pose together at the Mar-a-Lago estate in Palm Beach in 1997.
Davidoff Studios/Getty Images
Donald Trump on Friday sued Rupert Murdoch and two Wall Street Journal reporters for defamation.
The Journal reported Thursday that Trump wrote a "bawdy" birthday letter to Jeffrey Epstein in 2003.
If the suit doesn't settle, the discovery process could raise more questions about Trump's ties to Epstein.
President Donald Trump's latest defamation suit, filed in response to a recent story by The Wall Street Journal, could raise more questions about the president's relationship with the late financier, Jeffrey Epstein.
Trump on Friday filed the lawsuit against Rupert Murdoch, Dow Jones, News Corp. CEO Robert Thomson, and Journal reporters Khadeeja Safdar and Joseph Palazzolo.
The suit, which seeks at least $10 billion in damages, accuses the group of committing defamation by publishing an article about a suggestive letter bearing Trump's name that the Journal reported was given to Epstein on his 50th birthday in 2003. Trump has denied that he wrote the letter.
Chris Mattei, a former federal prosecutor who served as lead attorney for Sandy Hook families in their defamation suit against Alex Jones, told BI that the lawsuit has several possible paths: the defendants move to dismiss the case with a limited discovery process, they skip the motion for dismissal and move instead for an open discovery process, or they settle out of court.
In a statement after the lawsuit was filed, a Dow Jones spokesperson said, "We have full confidence in the rigor and accuracy of our reporting, and will vigorously defend against any lawsuit."
Representatives for News Corp., Trump's legal team, and the White House did not immediately respond to requests for comment from Business Insider.
A discovery process
Damon Dunn, a First Amendment and media attorney, told BI that, in order to win his suit at trial, Trump would have to prove the story was false, damaging to his reputation, and published with constitutional or "actual" malice — a high legal standard requiring the plaintiff to prove the defendant knew the statement was false, or acted with reckless disregard for its veracity, when publishing it.
"The provenance of the 'card' appears suspect, but, even so, is it defamatory that one millionaire sent a birthday card to another in 2003 before Epstein was discovered?" Dunn said, referring to the time before Epstein had been convicted of sex crimes.
The discovery process could be limited to whether the Journal published with actual malice, even if it wrongly attributed the card to Trump, Dunn said. That would be similar towhen a court dismissed actor Justin Baldoni's defamation case against The New York Times, he added.
However, Mattei said that the Journal may seek reciprocal discovery, meaningit can ask Trump to provide them with any information or evidence he has not only about the writing of the letter but also about his relationship with Epstein, even about the extent to which he may have been aware of Epstein's crimes.
"If Trump's defense is that this was false, then any evidence suggesting that he had a relationship with Epstein, the degree to which that relationship was close or not, would be relevant to the question of whether or not it's likely Trump had any sort of role in this letter," Mattei said. "And so an aggressive Wall Street Journal here would seek broad discovery about the extent of Trump's relationship with Epstein."
Dunn said it's possible the defendants may pursue a reciprocal discovery process, but it would be expensive, and Trump's relationship with Epstein would be of "questionable relevance" to the proceedings, so such a move may not be worth it in the end.
Mattei said he felt Trump's case is unlikely to have merit, describing the suit as Trump's attempt to "explore what kind of power and leverage he has over the American media." Still, the judge will decide how long the procedural elements of the case take to play out.
"There will be some period of weeks where The Wall Street Journal will be able to file its motion to dismiss if it wants to make a request for discovery, the judgment rule on that request could take a little bit more time," Mattei said. "And so if it is indeed contested, you could see the initial phase of this, including discovery, playing out over the next six months."
Trump's long history with Epstein
The suit against Murdoch and the Journal reporters comes as Trump continues to grapple with his ties to Epstein, a convicted sex offender.
Trump has said that he was friends with Epstein for more than 15 years, beginning in the 1980s. The pair were regularly seen socializing at parties, and Trump told New York Magazine in 2002 that Epstein was a "terrific guy."
Trump said in 2019 that he and Epstein had a "falling out" in 2004 after a real estate dispute, and he was "not a fan" of his former friend, The New York Times reported.
Publicly available documents related to Epstein's sex trafficking trial have not revealed any wrongdoing by Trump; his name and those of some of his family members were listed in one of Epstein's contact books, and Trump is mentioned as a passenger in flight logs for Epstein's private jets.
As part of his reelection campaign, Trump promised he would make public all the available files related to the government's investigation into Epstein's crimes. The Justice Department published an unsigned memo on July 7 that said it won't release any more "Epstein Files."
In a Saturday post on Truth Social, Trump revisited the idea of releasing more Epstein-related documents, writing that he had asked the Justice Department to "release all Grand Jury testimony with respect to Jeffrey Epstein, subject only to Court Approval."
"With that being said, and even if the Court gave its full and unwavering approval, nothing will be good enough for the troublemakers and radical left lunatics making the request," Trump said in the post. "It will always be more, more, more."
This story has been updated to clarify the legal issues.
The first half of 2025 wasn't kind to a number of promising artificial intelligence (AI) stocks, particularly in the software space. However, the second half could be very different.
Let's look at five stocks that were AI losers in the first half of 2025 that look poised to rebound in the second half.
Where to invest $1,000 right now? Our analyst team just revealed what they believe are the 10 best stocks to buy right now. Continue »
Alphabet
Alphabet (NASDAQ: GOOGL)(NASDAQ: GOOG) continues to be one of the most misunderstood stocks in the market. Investors keep worrying about AI disrupting its core search business, but that misses the bigger picture. Google isn't a search company -- it's a content discovery platform with a huge distribution advantage and decades of behavioral data behind it.
Alphabet's browser and mobile operating system give it an enormous edge. Chrome commands more than 65% of global browser share, while Android runs on over 70% of smartphones. Meanwhile, Google has revenue-sharing deals to be the default search engine across Apple devices and other browsers. As search and AI evolve, that distribution becomes increasingly important.
At the same time, Google has stepped up its game with its new AI-powered Search Mode. In a recent Oppenheimer survey, 82% of users found it more helpful than traditional search, and 75% preferred it to ChatGPT. Importantly, Google doesn't need to change user behavior and have people switch over to its apps. Its billions of users just need to click AI Mode to get this experience.
Its cloud computing business is also gaining traction. Google Cloud revenue rose 28% last quarter, and the company is investing heavily to build capacity to keep up with demand. Add in under-appreciated assets like its Waymo robotaxi business and its Willow quantum chip, and Alphabet looks ready to rebound in the back half.
GitLab
Another company that is misunderstood is GitLab(NASDAQ: GTLB). Investors are worried that with AI, organizations are going to need fewer coders. However, thus far AI has led to more software development, while GitLab has quietly been transforming itself into a software development lifecycle platform.
The company took a big step forward in this direction with the release of GitLab 18. It added over 30 new features, including its Duo Agent Platform, which allows users to deploy AI agents across the entire development cycle from code generation to testing to compliance. This is important, as according to William Blair, developers only spend about 20% of their time actually writing code.
The company has already been growing revenue at a strong clip, including 27% last quarter. The growth is being driven by new customers as well as existing customers buying more seats and upgrading tiers. GitLab has also been expanding key partnerships, including with Amazon.
As a company that is helping drive end-to-end development workflow efficiency, GitLab has a strong future ahead and looks like a solid rebound candidate.
Image source: Getty Images.
Salesforce
Salesforce(NYSE: CRM) has spent the last year refocusing its platform around AI. Its new Agentforce platform has over 4,000 paying customers already, and it's at the center of what could become a much bigger digital labor platform.
The company's strategy is to unify apps, data, automation, and metadata to a single framework called ADAM. It will then use this as a foundation to build and scale AI agents, helping create a digital workforce. It also recently rolled out a more flexible pricing model tied to outcomes to help increase adoption.
Salesforce is already the leader in customer relationship management (CRM) software, and its push into AI agents could be a huge growth driver. With the stock lagging in the first half, it could rebound if Agentforce starts to gain more traction.
ServiceNow
ServiceNow(NYSE: NOW) may not be an obvious AI name, but it's also using AI to help transform its business. The company's roots are in IT management, but it has since expanded into human resources, finance, and customer service.
The company's strength has always been connecting siloed departments and helping organizations streamline their operations. It has embedded AI into its Now Platform, helping take these efforts to the next level. It's been seeing strong traction, with AI-driven Pro Plus deals quadrupling year over year last quarter. As organizations increasingly focus on efficiency and automation to help reduce costs, ServiceNow is well-positioned.
While some investors worry about enterprise software budgets, ServiceNow is a cost-saving platform that should continue to perform well in the current environment. That should help set the stock up to rebound later this year.
SentinelOne
SentinelOne's (NYSE: S) stock was under pressure in the first half of the year, but there's a good reason to believe that it will perform much better in the second half. The big reason is that its new partnership with Lenovo is about to ramp up.
Lenovo is the world's largest enterprise PC vendor, and starting in the second half, it will pre-install SentinelOne's Singularity Platform on all new computers it sells. Existing Lenovo users will also be able to upgrade to SentinelOne's AI-powered security platform. That's a huge opportunity for the cybersecurity company.
SentinelOne has already been seeing solid revenue growth, including 23% last quarter. While it's not the leader in the endpoint security space -- that would be CrowdStrike -- its platform receives high marks from Gartner. Meanwhile, its Purple AI solution, which helps analysts hunt complex security threats through the use of natural language prompts, has been the fastest-growing solution in its history.
All in all, SentinelOne is a solid company whose stock trades at a big discount to some of its bigger peers. Meanwhile, the Lenovo deal should be a catalyst in the second half.
Should you invest $1,000 in GitLab right now?
Before you buy stock in GitLab, consider this:
The Motley Fool Stock Advisor analyst team just identified what they believe are the 10 best stocks for investors to buy now… and GitLab wasn’t one of them. The 10 stocks that made the cut could produce monster returns in the coming years.
Consider when Netflix made this list on December 17, 2004... if you invested $1,000 at the time of our recommendation, you’d have $652,133!* Or when Nvidia made this list on April 15, 2005... if you invested $1,000 at the time of our recommendation, you’d have $1,056,790!*
Now, it’s worth noting Stock Advisor’s total average return is 1,048% — a market-crushing outperformance compared to 180% for the S&P 500. Don’t miss out on the latest top 10 list, available when you join Stock Advisor.
Suzanne Frey, an executive at Alphabet, is a member of The Motley Fool’s board of directors. John Mackey, former CEO of Whole Foods Market, an Amazon subsidiary, is a member of The Motley Fool’s board of directors. Geoffrey Seiler has positions in Alphabet, GitLab, Salesforce, and SentinelOne. The Motley Fool has positions in and recommends Alphabet, Amazon, Apple, CrowdStrike, GitLab, Salesforce, SentinelOne, and ServiceNow. The Motley Fool recommends Gartner. The Motley Fool has a disclosure policy.
Login
