David Pierce writes via The Verge: In the summer of 2019, Kevin Moody and Dennis Xu started meeting with investors to pitch their new app. They had this big idea about reshaping the way users' personal information moves around the internet, coalescing all their data into a single tool in a way that could actually work for them. But they quickly ran into a problem: all of their mock-ups and descriptions made it seem like they were building a note-taking app. And even in those hazy early days of product development -- before they had a prototype, a design, even a name -- they were crystal clear that this would not be a note-taking app. Instead, the founders wanted to create something much bigger. It would encompass all of your notes but also your interests, your viewing history, your works-in-progress. "Imagine if you had a Google search bar but for all nonpublic information," Xu says. "For every piece of information that was uniquely relevant to you."

That's what Moody and Xu were actually trying to build. So they kept tweaking the approach until it made sense. At one point, their app was going to be called NSFW, a half-joke that stood for "Notes and Search for Work," and for a while, it was called Supernote. But after a few meetings and months, they eventually landed on the name "Mem." Like Memex, a long-imagined device that humans could use to store their entire memory. Or like, well, memory. Either way, it's not a note-taking app. It's more like a protocol for private information, a way to pipe in everything that matters to you -- your email, your calendar events, your airline confirmations, your meeting notes, that idea you had on the train this morning -- and then automatically organize and make sense of it all. More importantly, it's meant to use cutting-edge AI to give all that information back to you at exactly the right time and in exactly the right place. [...]

So far, Mem is mostly a note-taking app. It's blisteringly fast and deliberately sparse -- mostly just a timeline of every mem (the company's parlance for an individual note) you've ever created or viewed, with a few simple ways to categorize and organize them. It does tasks and tags, but a full-featured project manager or Second Brain system this is not. But if you look carefully, the app already contains a few signs of where Mem is headed: a tool called Writer that can actually generate information for you, based on both its knowledge of the public internet and your personal information; AI features that summarize tweet threads for you; a sidebar that automatically displays mems related to what you're working on. All this still barely scratches the surface of what Mem wants to do and will need to do to be more than a note-taking app...

"Code generation AI — AI systems that can write in different programming languages given a prompt — promise to cut development costs while allowing coders to focus on creative, less repetitive tasks," writes VentureBeat.

"But while research labs like OpenAI and Alphabet-backed DeepMind have developed powerful code-generating AI, many of the most capable systems aren't available in open source." For example, the training data for OpenAI's Codex, which powers GitHub's Copilot feature, hasn't been made publicly available, preventing researchers from fine-tuning the AI model or studying aspects of it such as interpretability.

To remedy this, researchers at Carnegie Mellon University — Frank Xu, Uri Alon, Graham Neubig, and Vincent Hellendoorn — developed PolyCoder, a model based on OpenAI's GPT-2 language model that was trained on a database of 249 gigabytes of code across 12 programming languages. While PolyCoder doesn't match the performance of top code generators in every task, the researchers claim that PolyCoder is able to write in C with greater accuracy than all known models, including Codex....

"Large tech companies aren't publicly releasing their models, which is really holding back scientific research and democratization of such large language models of code," the researchers said. "To some extent, we hope that our open-sourcing efforts will convince others to do the same. But the bigger picture is that the community should be able to train these models themselves. Our model pushed the limit of what you can train on a single server — anything bigger requires a cluster of servers, which dramatically increases the cost."

An anonymous reader shares a report: As colleges around China approach their final few weeks before the winter break, frequent users of Douyin (TikTok's Chinese version) may have noticed a new type of post in their feeds: students asking for likes and followers to pass their final exams. Xu Maomao, for example, posted a video hash-tagged "SOS," where she pled for 10,000 followers in order to complete a course called "Self-Made Media Content Creation and Operation" that she is taking at the Communication University of Zhejiang (CUZ). "I am now an ordinary college student forced to become a social media influencer," joked Xu Maomao. As influencers in Europe struggle to balance the weight of selling a brand and remaining âoeauthenticâ to their followers, their Chinese counterparts are taking college courses that will help them secure a career path towards the lucrative profession of social media influencers.

From China's e-commerce hub Hangzhou, to the inland agricultural base of Henan Province, and even in far-off Tibet, vocational colleges across China are training young people to become professional influencers. Semesters are now spent on entry-level courses on topics such as short-video editing, social media marketing, e-commerce, and other aspects of the new "trade," and are often taught in cooperation with industry players such as the social media platforms themselves. By offering these courses, the Chinese higher education system is now part of the driving force for the professionalization of Chinese social media influencers and is producing a large talent pool that is now pouring into the country's flourishing digital economy. By December 16, two days before the deadline, Xu Maomao was still half way to go towards the goal of 10,000 followers. Her course instructor eventually agreed that anyone with 5,000 followers could get a 90 for the final exam, perhaps because too few had achieved the original target.

DoorDash, the food delivery app based out of San Francisco, is requiring all its nondelivery employees, including CEO Tony Xu, to do a "dash" once a month -- and some employees are seemingly furious. SFGate reports: MarketWatch first reported that the WeDash program, which was launched when the service was founded, is making its return in January after being paused during the pandemic. A spokesperson for DoorDash confirmed its return to SFGATE. But a 1,500-comment thread on Blind, the anonymous social media platform for techies and other white-collar types, was started last week by one disgruntled DoorDash worker.

An engineer with a reported total compensation, or TC, of $400,000 a year griped about the responsibility of having to do a once-a-month delivery. "What the actual f--k?" the engineer wrote on the platform. "I didn't sign up for this, there was nothing in the offer letter/job description about this." While some people replied to the original post to say it would be a helpful opportunity to develop empathy and learn about the myriad frustrations of delivery workers, others sided with the original poster. "Not acceptable in anyway!" said one.

For employees unable to do deliveries, there are other programs in place to work with service employees and businesses. The program was launched, a spokesperson said, to "learn first-hand how the technology products we build empower local economies, which in turn helps us build a better product." Employees then gain "credits" through these services, which are reportedly built into an annual review. The money employees make during deliveries will be donated to a nonprofit, the spokesperson said.

In yet another shift away from its traditional hardware business, Huawei has sold its x86 server unit to a state-owned Chinese firm. Light Reading reports: China company registration data confirms that the sale to Henan Information Industry Investment Co. Ltd., owned by the Henan provincial government, concluded on November 5. The size of the transaction has not been disclosed. Huawei's server business, like its once high-flying handset division, has been hit badly by US sanctions, which prevent it from obtaining the Intel chips that power 90% of the world's servers. The vendor flagged the possibility of a sale at a company event six weeks ago. Eric Xu, one of Huawei's three co-chairmen, acknowledged the server unit had "encountered difficulties" and said Huawei was in discussions with some potential investors.

The chairman of Huawei said the Chinese technology company's "aim is to survive" as revenue fell almost 30% in the first half of the year. CNBC reports: The Shenzhen-headquartered company, which was put on the U.S. trade blacklist in 2019, announced Friday that it generated 320.4 billion yuan ($49.6 billion) in revenue in the first half of 2021. It's a significant fall from the 454 billion yuan that Huawei recorded in the first half of 2020. Huawei said its profit margin grew 0.6% to 9.8%, largely as a result of efficiency improvements, and added that the overall performance was in line with forecasts. Eric Xu, Huawei's rotating chairman, said in a statement that the company had set its strategic goals for the next five years. "Our aim is to survive, and to do so sustainably," he said.

Former U.S. President Donald Trump put Huawei on an export blacklist in 2019, a move that prevents American firms from doing business with it. For instance, Google was no longer allowed to license its Android mobile operating system to Huawei. The blacklist blocks U.S. companies from selling or transferring technology to Huawei unless they are granted a special license. It has hampered Huawei's ability to design its own chips and source other components. Xu said in April that Huawei has ramped up its research and development investment as part of its efforts to "keep the company afloat, to address supply continuity challenges caused by U.S. bans, and to pursue sustainability well into the future."

For some time, a collaboration of biologists, chemists and physicists centered at the Universities of Oldenburg (Germany) and Oxford (UK) have been gathering evidence suggesting that the magnetic sense of migratory birds such as European robins is based on a specific light-sensitive protein in the eye. In the current edition of the journal Nature, this team demonstrate that the protein cryptochrome 4, found in birds' retinas, is sensitive to magnetic fields and could well be the long-sought magnetic sensor. Phys.Org reports: First author Jingjing Xu, a doctoral student in Henrik Mouritsen's research group in Oldenburg, took a decisive step toward this success. After extracting the genetic code for the potentially magnetically sensitive cryptochrome 4 in night-migratory European robins, she was able, for the first time, to produce this photoactive molecule in large quantities using bacterial cell cultures. Christiane Timmel's and Stuart Mackenzie's groups in Oxford then used a wide range of magnetic resonance and novel optical spectroscopy techniques to study the protein and demonstrate its pronounced sensitivity to magnetic fields.

The team also deciphered the mechanism by which this sensitivity arises -- another important advance. "Electrons that can move within the molecule after blue-light activation play a crucial role," explains Mouritsen. Proteins like cryptochrome consist of chains of amino acids: robin cryptochrome 4 has 527 of them. Oxford's Peter Hore and Oldenburg physicist Ilia Solov'yov performed quantum mechanical calculations supporting the idea that four of the 527 -- known as tryptophans -- are essential for the magnetic properties of the molecule. According to their calculations, electrons hop from one tryptophan to the next generating so-called radical pairs which are magnetically sensitive. To prove this experimentally, the team from Oldenburg produced slightly modified versions of the robin cryptochrome, in which each of the tryptophans in turn was replaced by a different amino acid to block the movement of electrons. Using these modified proteins, the Oxford chemistry groups were able to demonstrate experimentally that electrons move within the cryptochrome as predicted in the calculations -- and that the generated radical pairs are essential to explain the observed magnetic field effects. Hore says "if we can prove that cryptochrome 4 is the magnetic sensor we will have demonstrated a fundamentally quantum mechanism that makes animals sensitive to environmental stimuli a million times weaker than previously thought possible."

Huawei has blamed the U.S. for the chip crunch rocking the global tech industry, saying Washington's sanctions against Chinese companies have spurred panic buying of semiconductors and other supplies. From a report: "Because of the U.S. sanctions against Huawei, we have seen panic stockpiling among global companies, especially the Chinese ones. In the past, companies were barely stockpiling, but now they are building up three or six months' worth of inventory ... and that has disrupted the whole system," Rotating Chairman Eric Xu said at the company's 18th Huawei Analyst Summit. The U.S. has placed Huawei and other Chinese tech companies on trade blacklists that restrict their access to American technology, citing national security risks. "Clearly the unwarranted U.S. sanctions against Huawei and other [Chinese] companies are creating an industry-wide supply shortage, and this could even trigger a new global economic crisis," Xu added. Xu's remarks come hours before the White House plans to host a summit aimed at addressing the chip shortage, with an emphasis on its impact on the automotive industry. Dozens of executives from U.S., Asian and European tech companies and automakers -- including General Motors, Ford, Google, Intel, Taiwan Semiconductor Manufacturing Co., Samsung Electronics, and NXP -- are slated to attend the event. White House officials have already acknowledged that the chip shortage may be difficult to solve in the short term.

Huawei will invest $1 billion on researching self-driving and electric-car technologies, accelerating plans to compete with Tesla and Xiaomi in the world's biggest vehicle arena. From a report: Huawei's autonomous-driving technology has already surpassed Tesla's in some spheres, for instance by allowing cars to cruise for more than 1,000 kilometers (621 miles) without human intervention, Rotating Chairman Eric Xu told analysts in Shenzhen Monday. The Chinese telecom giant will partner with three automakers initially to make self-driving cars that carry the Huawei name as a sub-brand, said Xu, one of three executives who take turns to fill the post. It will keep its circle of partners small and get its logo onto cars -- not unlike how Intel calls attention to its microprocessors on PCs -- that adopt its autonomous driving technology, he added. The mobile giant has so far agreed to team up with BAIC Group, Chongqing Changan Automobile and Guangzhou Automobile Group.

Two Android applications belonging to Chinese tech giant Baidu were removed from the official Google Play Store at the end of October after they were caught collecting sensitive user details. From a report: The two apps -- Baidu Maps and Baidu Search Box -- were removed after Google received a report from US cyber-security firm Palo Alto Networks. Both apps had more than 6 million downloads combined before being removed. According to the US security firm, the two apps contained code that collected information about each user's phone model, MAC address, carrier information, and IMSI (International Mobile Subscriber Identity) number. The data collection code was found in the Baidu Push SDK, used to show real-time notifications inside both apps. Palo Alto Networks security researchers Stefan Achleitner and Chengcheng Xu, who identified the data collection code, said that while some of the collected information is "rather harmless," some data like the IMSI code "can be used to uniquely identify and track a user, even if that user switches to a different phone." The research team said that while the collection of personal user details is not specifically forbidden by Google's policy for Android apps after they reported the issue to Google, the Play Store security team confirmed their findings and "identified [additional] unspecified violations" in the two Baidu apps, which eventually led to the two apps being removed from the official store on October 28.

An anonymous reader quotes a report from Ars Technica: Adblocking extensions with more than 300,000 active users have been surreptitiously uploading user browsing data and tampering with users' social media accounts thanks to malware its new owner introduced a few weeks ago, according to technical analyses and posts on Github. Hugo Xu, developer of the Nano Adblocker and Nano Defender extensions, said 17 days ago that he no longer had the time to maintain the project and had sold the rights to the versions available in Google's Chrome Web Store. Xu told me that Nano Adblocker and Nano Defender, which often are installed together, have about 300,000 installations total.

Four days ago, Raymond Hill, maker of the uBlock Origin extension upon which Nano Adblocker is based, revealed that the new developers had rolled out updates that added malicious code. The first thing Hill noticed the new extension doing was checking if the user had opened the developer console. If it was opened, the extension sent a file titled "report" to a server at https://def.dev-nano.com/. "In simple words, the extension remotely checks whether you are using the extension dev tools -- which is what you would do if you wanted to find out what the extension is doing," he wrote. The most obvious change end users noticed was that infected browsers were automatically issuing likes for large numbers of Instagram posts, with no input from users. Cyril Gorlla, an artificial intelligence and machine learning researcher at the University of California in San Diego, told me that his browser liked more than 200 images from an Instagram account that didn't follow anyone. The screenshot to the right shows some of the photos involved.

An anonymous reader quotes a report from Scientific American: Stomach ulcers and other gastric wounds afflict one in eight people worldwide, but common conventional therapies have drawbacks. Now scientists aim to treat such problems by exploring a new frontier in 3-D printing: depositing living cells directly inside the human body. [...] In their effort to treat stomach lesions less invasively, scientists in China wanted to develop a miniature bioprinting robot that could enter the human body with relative ease. The researchers used existing techniques for creating dexterous electronic devices, such as mechanical bees and cockroach-inspired robots, says the study's senior author Tao Xu, a bioengineer at Tsinghua University in Beijing.

The resulting micro robot is just 30 millimeters wide -- less than half the width of a credit card -- and can fold to a length of 43 millimeters. Once inside a patient's body, it unfolds to become 59 millimeters long and can start bioprinting. "The team has constructed clever mechanisms that make the system compact when entering the body yet unfurl to provide a large working area once past the tight constrictions at entry," says David Hoelzle, a mechanical engineer at the Ohio State University, who did not take part in the study. In their experiments, the researchers in China fitted the micro robot onto an endoscope (a long tube that can be inserted through bodily openings) and successfully snaked it through a curved pipe into a transparent plastic model of a stomach. There, they used it to print gels loaded with human stomach lining and stomach muscle cells (which were grown in culture by a commercial laboratory) onto a lab dish. The printed cells remained viable and steadily proliferated over the course of 10 days. "This study is the first attempt to combine micro robots and bioprinting together," Xu says. The study has been published in the journal Biofabrication.

An anonymous reader shares an opinion piece from Wired, written by Kevin Xu and Jordan Schneider. Xu is the author of Interconnected, investor and advisor of open source startups at OSS Capital, and served in the Obama White House. Schneider is the author of the ChinaTalk newsletter and host of the ChinaTalk podcast, posted on Lawfare. From the report: Open source is a technology development and distribution methodology, where the codebase and all development -- from setting a roadmap to building new features, fixing bugs, and writing documentation -- is done in public. A governing body (a group of hobbyists, a company, or a foundation) publicly manages this work, which is most often done in a public repository on either GitHub or GitLab. Open source has two important, and somewhat counterintuitive, advantages: speed and security. These practices lead to faster technological developments, because a built-in global community of developers help them mature, especially if the technology is solving a real problem. Top engineers also prefer to work with and on open source projects. Wrongly cast as secretive automatons, they are more often like artists, who prefer to learn, work, collaborate, and showcase what they've built in public, even when they are barely compensated for that work.

But doesn't keeping a technology's codebase open make it more vulnerable to attack? In fact, exposing the codebase publicly for security experts and hackers to easily access and test is the best way to keep the technology secure and build trust with end users for the long haul. Sunlight is the best disinfectant, and open source is that sunlight in technology. Linux, the operating system, and Kubernetes, the cloud container orchestration system, are two of the most prominent examples. [...] Using open source technology is now the fastest way new products get built and legacy technologies get replaced. Yet as US policymakers develop their industrial policy to compete with China, open source is conspicuously absent.

By leaning on the advantages of open source, policymakers can pursue an industrial policy to help the US compete in the 21st century in line with our broader values. The alternative is to continue a top-down process that picks winners and losers based on not just technology but also political influence, which only helps individual firms secure market share, not sparking innovation more broadly. A few billion more dollars won't save Intel from its technical woes, but a healthier ecosystem leveraging open source technology and community would put the US in a better position for the future. Open source technology allows for vendor-neutrality. Whether you're a country or a company, if you use open source, you're not locked in to another company's technical stack, roadmap, or licensing agreements. After Linux was first created in 1991, it was widely adopted by large companies like Dell and IBM as a vendor neutral alternative to Microsoft's Windows operating system. In the future, chip designers won't be locked into Intel or ARM with RISC-V. With OpenRAN, 5G network builders won't be forced to buy from Huawei, Nokia, or Ericsson. [...] By doubling down on open source, America not only can address some of our most pressing technological challenges faster and more securely, but also revive relationships with our allies and deepen productive collaborations with the tech sector.

"Steve Saleen claims that China has stolen 40 years' worth of intellectual property from him in launching the Saleen brand in China," reports the site Carscoops.

More information from the Los Angeles Times: Saleen's Chinese backers have accused his business partner of fraud and embezzlement and taken over the company, freezing its accounts and forcing hundreds of employees out of work. Police raided the sprawling new factory emblazoned with Saleen's name. Two senior executives were detained, and a court order sealed its Shanghai showroom... "What I'm trying to do is to bring to light how American companies will contribute IP, brands and knowhow to the China market — and overnight they will change direction, kick you out and keep the IP," Saleen said...

Whatever the outcome, Saleen's bid to bring his high-powered cars to China has crashed, leaving the 71-year-old filled with regret. "When it came to taking my brand on a global basis, it really seemed to offer me an opportunity that I could not refuse," Saleen said. "In hindsight I realize the deal was too good to be true...." Saleen said his experience should convince Washington to enact tougher protections for U.S. investors, deny Chinese firms that steal trade secrets access to capital markets and prohibit the use of Chinese asset valuations that could be subject to manipulation.
Carscoops has some more background: Writing in The Wall Street Journal, Saleen claims "the deal was a sham." According to the racing legend, the joint venture applied for 510 Chinese patents based on his designs, technologies, trade secrets and engineering developments. He adds that most of these patent filings didn't list him as an inventor. The company, known as Jiangsu Saleen Automotive Technologies (JSAT), unveiled a range of models 12 months ago.

Saleen asserts that the government of Rugao is attempting to take over the joint venture now that it has his intellectual property and patents. He claims that the director of corporate affairs for JSAT, Grace Yin Xu, has been missing since June 22 when she entered a government building shortly after refusing to lie to local law enforcement who wanted her to state Saleen's business partner had provided false information and embezzled money. In addition, the company's vice president of manufacturing, Frank Sterzer, was allegedly detained for six hours by the authorities.

In his op-ed, Saleen states that "China can no longer go unchecked", citing a 2019 survey that 20 per cent of North American corporations say the People's Republic has stolen their intellectual property in the past year.

Food delivery services like Grubhub should be thriving, especially during the pandemic. But they're not, The Markup reports: In August 2019, analysts from the investment firm Cowen estimated that Uber Eats was losing $3.36 on every order and would continue to lose money on every order for the next five years. Uber CEO Dara Khosrowshahi acknowledged that Uber Eats is not yet profitable in an email to employees in March after its parent company laid off more than 3,700 employees.... In early March, DoorDash filed to go public despite losing an estimated $450 million in 2019, according to The New York Times. DoorDash declined to comment on that estimate or its path to profitability, but regarding the latter CEO Tony Xu told Fortune in February that "we're working our way there...."

Meanwhile, other companies have been ditching the food delivery business: Yelp sold Eat24 to Grubhub, Square sold Caviar to DoorDash, and Amazon shut down its Amazon Restaurants delivery service.

Grubhub, which also owns Seamless, is publicly traded and the only one of the big four that has achieved profitability. Still, it lost more than a third of its value after revenue fell below investors' expectations in the third quarter of 2019. In a letter to shareholders, the company revealed two things: Customers were "promiscuous," or not loyal to the Grubhub platform, and the delivery part of the business was fundamentally not profitable. Instead, delivery was just a "means to an end" — getting restaurants to sign up on the Grubhub platform and then upselling them on "marketing" benefits, like greater visibility in Grubhub's search results. In other words, like many tech companies, GrubHub is primarily an advertising company.

"Bottom line is that you need to pay someone enough money to drive to the restaurant, pick up food and drive it to a diner. . . ," the company wrote. "At some point, delivery drones and robots may reduce the cost of fulfillment, but it will be a long time before the capital costs and ongoing operating expenses are less than the cost of paying someone for 30-45 minutes of their time."

U.S. prosecutors have charged four hackers said to be working for the Chinese military for the 2018 cyberattack at Equifax, which led to the theft of more than 147 million credit reports in a massive data breach. From a report: Attorney general William Barr accused the four members of the Chinese People's Liberation Army of hacking into the credit giant over a period of several months. The nine-charge indictment was announced Monday against Wu Zhiyong, Wang Qian, Xu Ke, and Liu Lei. "This is the largest theft of sensitive PII by state-sponsored hackers ever recorded," said FBI deputy director David Bowdich. Equifax revealed the data breach in September 2017, months after it discovered hackers had broken into its systems. An investigation showed the company failed to patch a web server it knew was vulnerable for weeks, which let hackers crash the servers and steal massive amounts of personal data.

Huawei reported resilient revenue for 2019 on Tuesday as the embattled Chinese technology group continues to grow despite prolonged American campaign against its business, but cautioned that growth next year could prove more challenging. From a report: Eric Xu, Huawei's rotating chairman, wrote in a New Year's message to employees that the company's revenue has topped 850 billion Chinese yuan ($122 billion) this year, a new record high for the Chinese group and an 18% increase over the previous year. Xu said Huawei, the second largest smartphone maker globally, sold 240 million handsets this year, up from 206 million last year. "These figures are lower than our initial projections, yet business remains solid and we stand strong in the face of adversity," he wrote. He acknowledged that Huawei is confronting a "strategic and long-term" campaign against its business by the U.S. government. If the campaign persists for long, it would create even more "difficult" environment for the 32-year-old firm to "survive and thrive," he said.

DoorDash, the leading food delivery app in the U.S., is still pocketing workers' tips, despite announcing last month that it would stop the practice and change its tipping policies. The announcement was made after a report from The New York Times highlighted how the company uses tips to make up the worker's base pay -- essentially stealing the money you're trying to give someone to maximize their profits. Vox reports: At the time, CEO Tony Xu announced in a series of tweets that DoorDash would institute a new model to ensure workers' earnings would "increase by the exact amount a customer tips on every order." Xu promised to provide "specific details in the coming days." The next day, Xu sent out a note to DoorDash workers, broadly outlining changes and letting them know âoewhat to expect in the days ahead."

But 27 days later, current DoorDash workers tell Recode that the company's pay and tipping policies have stayed the same. The company has not made any public statements about its worker pay and how it plans to institute the changes, nor has it offered a specific date when it will fulfill its promise. A spokesperson declined to comment about the company's plans to change its tipping policy. Soon after DoorDash's years-long tipping scheme was mentioned in the NYT's report, a class-action lawsuit was filed against the company for misleading its customers about how their tips were used. The lawsuit, filed at the end of July, claims that DoorDash failed to make clear to its customers that tips they gave through its app to couriers were not being allocated as they were intended to be, and that had customers known this, they would not have tipped through the app.

An anonymous reader quotes a report from Gizmodo: DoorDash's years-long scheme to use customer tips to subsidize its workers' wages is finally catching up to the company. And hot on the heels of renewed outrage about its tip-shaving scheme, a new class-action lawsuit is taking aim at the company for misleading its customers about how their tips were used. The suit, filed this week in the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of New York on behalf of Brooklyn resident Alan Arkin and "others similarly situated," claims that that DoorDash failed to make clear to its customers that tips they gave through its app to couriers were not being allocated as they were intended to be, and that had customers known this, they would not have tipped through the app.

The suit defines a member of the class as someone who has "used DoorDash and paid a tip through the Door Dash app within the statutory period." "DoorDash has engaged in unlawful and deceptive acts, practices and misconduct by misleading Plaintiff and the consuming public to believe that the tip amount entered on the DoorDash app would be received as a tip by the DoorDash delivery workers for their service," the filing states. "DoorDash knew, and failed to disclose, that the tip amount entered by Plaintiff and other consumers on the app was received by DoorDash, in whole or in part, and used to subsidize its cost of doing business." Gizmodo explains the tipping policy that got DoorDash in hot water: "Through a system introduced in 2017, DoorDash can pay as little as $1 per delivery to a worker depending on the amount that a customer tips on the order. This system promises a guaranteed earning, for example, $8, that the dasher will make on a delivery. If a customer does not tip, DoorDash will pay out $1 plus the remaining $7 it takes to make up that promised wage. However, if a customer does tip, their money will be used to subsidize the worker's guaranteed pay. In other words, customers are essentially paying DoorDash -- not the delivery worker -- with their tip."

DoorDash CEO Tony Xu said last week that the company would change its policy, but didn't get into specifics.

Yesterday, a New York Times reporter reported on how some delivery apps like DoorDash use your tip to make up the worker's base pay -- essentially stealing the money you're trying to give someone to maximize their profits. Following the backlash from that report, as well as others that exposed the controversial pay policy, DoorDash CEO Tony Xu announced his company will change its policy. Engadget reports: Without getting into specifics, which he said will be announced "in the coming days," Xu tweeted that his company misunderstood "that some customers who *did* tip would feel like their tip did not matter." So now, "the new model will ensure that Dashers' earnings will increase by the exact amount a customer tips on every order." Or, the way you probably thought tips worked.