Best printers for Home

Best Mixer Grinder

Best wired Earphones

Best 43 Inch TV in India

Best Wi Fi Routers

Best Home Theatre in India

Smart Watch under 5000

Best Laptops for Education

Best Laptop for Students

<ul class="summary-list"><li>President of the European Commission, <keyword id="1576144" type="PERSON" weightage="60" keywordseo="Ursula-von-der-Leyen">Ursula von der Leyen</keyword>, responds to an <a href="https://www.businessinsider.com/big-tech-private-data-facebook-google-apple-europe-eu-2021-1">open letter</a> from Axel Springer CEO Mathias Döpfner about regulating large tech companies. </li><li>She writes that the political power of tech giants needs to be limited, and lays out steps the European Union is already taking to protect consumers. </li><li>Ursula von der Leyen is the president of the European Commission. </li><li>This is an <keyword id="6356002" type="UNKNOWN" weightage="100" keywordseo="opinion">opinion</keyword> column. The thoughts expressed are those of the author. </li></ul>Dear Mr Döpfner, Many thanks for your kind <a href="https://www.businessinsider.com/big-tech-private-data-facebook-google-apple-europe-eu-2021-1">open letter</a>. By chance, on the same day your letter was published online, I spoke at the virtual World Economic Forum in Davos, on the very topic you raised - namely the darker side of digitalization. The growing power of the largest <keyword id="6357247" type="UNKNOWN" weightage="60" keywordseo="Internet">internet</keyword> platforms - and their incredible economic and even political influence - also leaves me increasingly concerned. I share your opinion that we cannot only talk about the great promise of the digital world - we must also talk about the problems it is creating for our economies, our societies, and our democracy. This recently hit home when I watched on television as the angry mob stormed the US Capitol. I found those images deeply unsettling. This is what happens when actions follow words. This is what happens when messages spread by online platforms and <keyword id="6354632" type="UNKNOWN" weightage="60" keywordseo="social-media">social media</keyword> become a threat to democracy. Read more: <a href="https://www.businessinsider.com/big-tech-private-data-facebook-google-apple-europe-eu-2021-1">It's time for Europe to take private data from the hands of powerful tech monopolies and give it back to the people</a>We should see those images from the United States as a warning. Despite all the basic trust in our <keyword id="28249" type="COMPANY" weightage="60" keywordseo="europe">Europe</keyword>an democracy, we in Europe are not immune to such a turn of events. It is easy to say that democratic values are part of our DNA. And this is, of course, true. However, it is essential for us to protect our democracy each and every day and to preserve our institutions from the influence of hate speech, disinformation, fake news, and incitement to violence.<h2>We need to limit the political power of internet giants </h2>The business model of online platforms not only has an impact on free and fair competition - it also has an impact on our democracies, our security, and the quality of our information. This is why we need to limit, by democratic means, the huge and, as of now, largely unchecked political power of the internet giants. In a world where polarizing opinions are the most likely to be heard, it is a short step from outlandish conspiracy theories to the death of a police officer. This was sadly exposed by the storming of the Capitol.Let me first make one thing clear to avoid any misunderstandings in our discussion. We in Europe prize innovation. We are enthusiastic about the wonders of modern technology. And we are curious about new things. German publishers are no different in this regard. They also tirelessly strive to adapt their publications to new, digital formats and test out what and what does not interest their readers. Moreover, every day now the pandemic is showing us how much digital applications - from home schooling to the home office - can help us. That is why we in Europe have decided to focus on digitalization alongside climate protection in the post-Corona crisis recovery. 20% of the money from our NextGenerationEU recovery programme will be spent on digital projects - whether to support the vibrant start-up scene in Lisbon or Sofia, to strengthen links between universities and research institutions, or to build a European cloud. Nevertheless, with all openness to the innovations of the digital world, Europe must never forget whom these applications are ultimately intended to serve - our citizens. For us, neither the market nor the state, but rather the people, are at the center of our European approach. That is why in December the Commission launched the Digital Services Act and the Digital Market Act. That is our new framework for the digital market and for our society. To put it very simply, we want to ensure that going forward what is unlawful in the analogue world is also unlawful online - just as you demanded in your letter. We also want the platforms to provide transparency regarding how their algorithms work. Decisions with extensive consequences for our democracy must not be made by computer programs over which no human has control.We also want clear requirements for internet firms to accept responsibility for the way in which they distribute, promote, and remove content - as well as identifying and mitigating the systemic risk that they can pose. Another thing is important to me: however tempting it may have been for Twitter to switch off former President Donald Trump's account, such serious interference with freedom of expression should not be based on company rules alone. There must be a legal framework for such far-reaching decisions. And that legal framework should be decided by parliaments and politicians, not managers in Silicon Valley. You are calling for measures to prevent large gatekeeper platforms from storing personally specific and sensitive data, and from using that data for commercial purposes. And it is true that whenever we visit a website and are asked to create a profile or when we conveniently register with a large platform, we have no idea what happens to our data. That is why Harvard Professor Shoshana Zuboff talks of "surveillance capitalism" in her seminal work, which you quote. And in the documentary "The Social Dilemma" we see how large platforms are interested in us, the users, as the product. The more they learn about us, the more valuable we are to them. That allows them to inundate us with targeted advertising and, in turn, to increase their revenue.<h2>How we intend to protect our consumers and their data</h2>Here are three examples of what we intend to do in order to protect our consumers and their data even better in the future. First, under our Digital Services Act, the large internet platforms - in other words those with more than 45 million users in the <keyword id="6355123" type="LOCATION" weightage="60" keywordseo="eu">EU</keyword> - have specific obligations. For example, in the future they will have to give their users the option of preventing recommendations of further content that are based on profiling, i.e. the systematic analysis of their data by computer programs. Second, we are reinforcing the provisions of our General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR). Although it only went into effect in 2018, the GDPR has already become a model for large parts of the world. This disproves your assertion that Europe almost always reacts too late. On the contrary, we were the ones who set standards early with the GDPR.In the future, we want to use our Digital Markets Act to prohibit large internet platforms from automatically combining their users' personal data collected from their main platform into a single profile with additional data from other services. This is how we intend to ward off the transparent consumer you so strongly warn against in your letter, and rightly so. It will also ensure that competition remains fair.Third, in consultation with our Member States, we will also propose a secure European identity this year and thereby provide our citizens with an alternative way of navigating the internet without reservations - whether that be to pay taxes, enroll in university, or rent an electric car. We are not only taking into account the concerns of our citizens with these initiatives. We are also complying with the obligations arising from European fundamental rights - in Europe the internet has long since ceased to be the Wild West. Articles Seven and Eight of the European Charter of Fundamental Rights safeguard the right to privacy and family life as well as the right to protection of personal data. These basic rights do not just exist on paper. As you have seen, they also guide us when legislating.And they have teeth in the courts. For example, you need only recall the two Schrems judgments, in which European Court of Justice declared instruments for transferring personal data to third countries unlawful. The result is that digital companies must guarantee EU standards are applied when they transfer personal data outside the EU. Failing this, forwarding of the data is prohibited. <h2>Potential cooperation with Washington</h2>You are no doubt relieved, as I am, that President Joe Biden's election means Europe once again has a friend in the White House. Indeed the first signals we hear from the new administration are promising, including possible cooperation on digital matters.As a first step, I could envisage a joint Trade and Technology Council in which we agree on standards and norms. Together with the United States we could also create a digital rulebook which would have global effects. This could deal with matters ranging from data protection and privacy to the security of technical infrastructure. It would be a rulebook based on our values: human rights and pluralism, inclusion, and the protection of privacy. Even a project which until recently we believed we might have to implement without our American friends - the introduction of a digital tax - suddenly seems once more to be something we could address jointly. You refer in your letter to the relentless rise of the large tech companies and their market value, which is soaring in this period of crisis. You contrast this with the estimated loss of 255 million jobs worldwide between January 2020 and January 2021. I am also concerned about how this crisis is increasing inequalities. Restaurant operators and business owners who closed down temporarily in order to ensure that we are all better protected against the virus now fear for their existence as a result of the lockdown. At the same time, many large internet groups are doing tremendous amounts of business - including some that are not yet even properly taxed in Europe. That is unfair, and we can no longer expect people to stand for it. Please do not misunderstand me. Our internal market, with access to 450 million consumers, exists to do business, and we invite companies from around the world to benefit from this unique opportunity. In return we expect that they contribute to financing all the things that make our single market so strong - schools and universities, research and infrastructure, reliable public institutions, and a health service which, day after day in this crisis, is demonstrating its resilience.We would therefore like to step up discussions about a tax of this kind within the framework of the Organisation for Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD) and hope to achieve agreement with the US there, too. But we remain determined to find a solution, if necessary on our own in Europe, in the course of this year. Dear Mr Döpfner, as you can see, we are already hard at work, using the many levers at Europe's disposal, because Europe is there to serve its citizens. That applies in both the analogue world and online. Without restrictions. Best regards, Ursula von der Leyen

President of the European Commission: Here's what the EU is doing to limit the power of tech giants

<div class="KonaFilter image-container display-table"><div><div class="image on-image">Axel SpringerMathias Döpfner</div></div></div><ul class="summary-list"><li>The European Parliament passed <a href="https://www.businessinsider.com/eu-copyright-directive-parliament-votes-to-pass-laws-2019-3/">controversial new laws on internet copyright</a> in March. </li><li>German publication WELT spoke to Mathias Döpfner, President of the German Publishers' Association, about the new laws. </li><li>Döpfner, who is also CEO of German media company Axel Springer, WELT and Business Insider's parent company, hasn't previously given an interview to an Axel Springer publication. In this case, he made the comments in his role as President of the German Publishers' Association, not as Axel Springer CEO. </li><li>He said: "I am absolutely convinced that this decision will allow the Internet to become freer and more diverse. A lot of people who were against the reform will come to realize that."</li><li>He also took aim at the <a href="https://www.businessinsider.com/reddit-wikipedia-and-pornhub-protest-eu-copyright-laws-2019-3">tech companies that fought against the laws</a>.</li><li>"The efficiency and the chutzpah they have shown in manipulating the users have taken on unbelievable dimensions," he said. "It's shocking to see how these platforms have won over certain age groups and target groups with their fact-free polemics."</li></ul>The European Parliament's approval of the copyright reform is a historical turning point, not only for the media industry and the entire creative sector.Mathias Döpfner, President of the German Publishers' Association and CEO of Axel Springer, sees it as far more, namely as a sign that citizens are starting to emancipate themselves from the excessive power of the American tech giants. (Axel Springer is Business Insider's parent company).Welt: Mr. Döpfner, large numbers of Internet users protested against the copyright reform passed by the European Parliament, because they are worried that it could destroy the Internet. Do we have a case here of the free press asserting itself over the free Internet?Mathias Döpfner: No. Firstly, it can't be a case of the press asserting itself over the Internet, because this reform has nothing to do with the press, or with newspapers. It's about the future of digital journalism. And anyway, as far as large number of Internet users go - a representative German survey showed that only 10 percent of those questioned actually reject the EU Parliament's decision, while 41 percent welcome the reform. The rest are undecided. This clearly shows that the Parliament's decision reflects the opinion of the citizens. I am absolutely convinced that this decision will allow the Internet to become freer and more diverse. A lot of people who were against the reform will come to realize that. In future we'll see more content, more diversity of opinion and more innovation in all areas, whether music, film or journalism.Welt: What makes you so sure of that?Döpfner: Because the reform creates incentives. All those people who create content will finally have the chance to develop a business model for what they do. If the situation we have had up to now continues, where people use the intellectual property of others for their own commercial ends without being obliged to pass on a fair share of the revenues, then in the long run people will stop producing content. Except, perhaps, the platforms themselves. And nobody can want that. At the moment, the platforms take all the content and use it without paying a penny for that. Quality journalism, for example, is expensive. Investigative research means traveling, and colleagues sometimes even risk life and limb to uncover a story. Enough people will only stay in the business in the long term if it remains a viable business model. Every blogger, every founder of a content start-up now sees opportunities arise. And that will stimulate innovation and competition.Welt: Publishers have been campaigning for stricter copyright laws for a long time. As head of the German Publishers' Association do you feel like you've won a victory?Döpfner: The notion of victory is very old school. I'm just happy about the outcome. Almost exactly ten years ago, I said in public for the first time that digital journalism will only be able to survive if it finds readers who are willing to pay. And that there would only be paying readers if a legal framework was in place that protects intellectual property. Back then people laughed at you for thinking like that. They thought you just didn't understand the Internet. Reach and clicks were the currency of the Internet, not money. The industry has come a long way since then.Welt: Have the media houses not contributed towards the no-cost mentality on the Internet themselves?Döpfner: Yes, they have, because publishers worldwide misunderstood the Internet, seeing it as an advertising platform for their analog products. They underestimated the Internet. It soon became clear, however, that the Internet is not a marketing instrument for newspapers, but rather a new form of newspaper. That's why it's nonsensical propaganda to say that publishers only support the copyright reform because they want to rescue their dying newspapers. Not one single printed newspaper will extend its life because of the reform.Welt: Critics say that the large, established publishing houses will benefit most from the reform.Döpfner: The opposite is true. Large media enterprises could very easily survive without this reform, because they all have enough other fields of business. And also because, just by virtue of their size alone, they are more able to represent their interests vis-À-vis the tech platforms than, for example, a regional newspaper that has to become digital, or a blogger who wants to turn his idealistic interests into a profession he can live from. Copyright laws that work are vital for the small entities out there.Welt: It's even more surprising in the debate that many users took Google's side instead of supporting the creative industry.Döpfner: If we really did need any more proof of why a regulatory initiative like this is vital to counter the unfair competitive situation that favors the American tech monopolies, then we have it now. The efficiency and the chutzpah they have shown in manipulating the users have taken on unbelievable dimensions. It's shocking to see how these platforms have won over certain age groups and target groups with their fact-free polemics. Self-proclaimed experts on the Internet, who haven't come up with one single useful proposal about how to finance free journalism in the digital world. Churning out the same old arguments like a broken record - because the copyright reform is the end of the no-cost Internet. But they don't have any real arguments.Welt: People's anger is aimed mainly at so-called upload filters, which can be used to check whether uploaded contents contain material that is protected by copyright.Döpfner: That's a buzzword being thrown about at the moment that I don't even want to go into, because it's symptomatic of the lack of sophistication in the debate.Welt: How so?Döpfner: Article 13, …Welt: … which is now Article 17 and aims to make sure that creatives are rewarded financially when their contents are uploaded onto digital platforms…Döpfner: … is a paragraph that for the most part serves the music industry and to some extent the film industry. We as publishing associations have never campaigned strongly for Article 13. And yet, people said, "The publishers want the upload filter and they're destroying the Internet." That's just not true.Welt: But you weren't against Article 13 either.Döpfner: No, because if we all only stand up for our own specific interests then things will never work as a whole. And the principle of intellectual property is right and applies for the entire copyright reform. It's urgently needed because intellectual property has to be protected differently in the virtual world than in the analog world. People didn't put newspapers onto photocopiers to earn money with the brands and texts of the publishers. But to do something comparable on the Internet, all it takes is just one click. That's what it was about for us. As for Article 13, we understand that it's important to the music industry. What we don't understand, however, is that the tech platforms act as if upload filters are the only way to protect intellectual property. That's a joke!Welt: Why don't you understand that?Döpfner: They can do a lot more than just identify copyright-protected material. The artificial intelligence that platforms like Google, Youtube, Facebook and Amazon use know our decisions before we've even reached them ourselves. AI can find out whether a man will be fired or a woman is pregnant before they even know it themselves. "Behavioral Targeting" is a characteristic feature of surveillance capitalism. And that's why the copyright reform is so important. It defends values that we can be proud of.Welt: Because it gets in the way of America's tech platforms?Döpfner: It's not about protectionism, or about cutting ourselves off from America - anyone who says that is just spouting propaganda. This whole subject has two dimensions, one of which is highly political. The question is, what kind of social system do we want to have and to what extent will the citizens of Europe and America resist being completely dominated by the regime of the American and Chinese tech giants. The copyright reform is the first case of citizens defending themselves against the manipulative monopolies. It's a really big thing we're talking about here, nothing less than the sovereignty of the citizen and the boundaries of surveillance capitalism. Who does data belong to? That's the crucial question in digitization.Welt: And the answer is?Döpfner: Certainly not a corporation. Or a state. There can be only one answer: the citizen, the individual. Our data are our property and we have a right to know what happens with our data. The fact that Facebook apparently created countless shadow profiles of citizens who never even used Facebook is frightening.Welt: A lot of citizens obviously don't feel that way. In the 1980s, many people took to the streets to protest the census, and today they give all their data away voluntarily.Döpfner: Responsibility can be hard work. So, relinquishing our responsibility sometimes seems like a sweet option, but it seduces people into being naïve and lethargic. But the mood is changing. More and more people, especially the very young, are realizing that, while most of these services don't cost anything on the face of it, we pay the price by handing over our data. That's a high price to pay, because the result is mass surveillance.Welt: Has this led you to change your own behavior?Döpfner: Yes, I only use services like that sparingly. You won't find me in Facebook, Instagram or Twitter. Despite that, every time I enter a search term, I create a user profile, and the geotagging on my smartphone supplies information to unknown third parties about everywhere I go.Welt: Is the message then: Yankees go home?Döpfner: It has nothing whatsoever to do with anti-Americanism. I'm more pro-America than most Americans. This decision on copyright is nothing less than the first step towards citizens taking back their knowledge and their will. It's a need that is growing in America as well. In Switzerland, citizens are referred to as sovereign. And citizens should also be sovereign in Europe and in the USA. In the last twenty years, Europe has allowed the tech giants to rob its knowledge and its will to a large extent. Anyone who gets a hold of information from the data resources of the large tech platforms, information down to the tiniest detail, will inevitably strive for dominance, not only economically, but also politically. Until now, we have subjugated ourselves to a kind of intoxication brought on by progress and technology. And finally, for the first time, we've done something to start turning the tide. My hope is that this movement will spread outwards from Europe and take hold in America.Welt: And, in the end, Google and Facebook will be destroyed, like Standard Oil?Döpfner: That is, in fact, what many economic experts, professors and politicians are demanding. And recently even an American senator. I don't want to go that far. That should remain a last resort. However, if Facebook becomes a media company that decides what news or opinions are good or bad, and who should be allowed to read what. And if Google transforms from being a search machine into an answer machine that trawls its information from the entire store of human intellect without paying for it - then yes. That's why I believe stronger regulation to be vital. Mark Zuckerberg, by the way, obviously sees it that way too. For example, to protect the private sphere. That's something he recently publicly reaffirmed. A consensus that many people have thought impossible to date.Welt: And what's next? The ancillary copyright law that was first introduced in Germany in 2012 has not fulfilled expectations. What makes you so sure that the same won't happen at European level?Döpfner: The platforms won't just ignore the democratic will of 500 million citizens. We now have a historic opportunity to create a healthy ecosystem between platforms and creative enterprises by making a few changes to the way we behave. People will be clever enough to grasp this opportunity and, by doing, prevent bad things from happening.Get the latest Google stock price<a href="http://markets.businessinsider.com/stock/GOOG-Quote"> here.</a> <div class="margin-top"> <h3>NOW WATCH: <a href="https://www.businessinsider.com/nasa-mars-rover-space-paints-vehicles-spacecraft-2019-4">How NASA paints its vehicles for space</a></h3> <div> </div> </div>

'Chutzpah,' manipulation, and 'fact-free polemics': Mathias Dopfner unloads on Silicon Valley after Europe votes to change the face of the internet

San Francisco, March 28 (IANS) As Moscow's invasion of <keyword id="83488" type="General" weightage="50" keywordseo="kiev" source="Orion">Kiev</keyword> has entered its second month, <keyword id="6360701" type="General" weightage="50" keywordseo="spacex" source="Orion">SpaceX</keyword> and Tesla CEO <keyword id="6355315" type="General" weightage="80" keywordseo="elon-musk" source="Orion">Elon Musk</keyword> said the world cannot let Russian President <keyword id="43440" type="General" weightage="50" keywordseo="vladimir-putin" source="Orion">Vladimir Putin</keyword> win in <keyword id="6355101" type="General" weightage="80" keywordseo="ukraine" source="Orion">Ukraine</keyword> because if he can get away with it, this will be a message to other countries that perhaps they could get away with it too. In an interview with Mathias Dopfner, the CEO of German publishing company Axel Springer, he said that the American government has done more for Ukraine than people may realise. <div type="image" title="Representative image" msid="90494614" hostid="261"></div> "But it has just not been very public. But it is important to do something serious. We cannot let <keyword id="6355086" type="General" weightage="80" keywordseo="putin" source="Orion">Putin</keyword> take over Ukraine. This is crazy," he told Dopfner at Tesla's factory in Fremont, California. Musk-run SpaceX has sent trucks full of <keyword id="7612156" type="General" weightage="80" keywordseo="starlink" source="Orion">Starlink</keyword> user terminals to Ukraine amid the Russian invasion so that the country remains online. "We did think that Starlink might be needed, and we took some preemptive actions to ensure that it could be provided quickly. When the request came, we acted very rapidly," he said. The satellite internet connectivity of Ukraine was taken offline permanently by a cyberattack on the day of the invasion on February 24. "The cell towers are either being blown up or they are being jammed. There is a major fiber backbone which the Russians are aware of. It was quite likely that they will sever that fiber link. This would leave Ukraine with very few connections open. So Starlink might be, certainly in some parts of Ukraine, the only connection," <keyword id="364027" type="General" weightage="100" keywordseo="musk" source="Orion">Musk</keyword> said in the interview that was published late on Sunday. On Russian threats to his own satellites, he said that if they attempt to take out Starlink, this is not easy because there are 2,000 satellites. "That means a lot of anti-satellite missiles. I hope we do not have to put this to a test, but I think we can launch satellites faster than they can launch anti-satellites missiles," Musk noted. Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky has invited Musk to visit his country after the war. SEE ALSO: <a target="_blank" class="c-link c-message_attachment__title_link" href="https://www.businessinsider.in/thelife/food/news/holding-no-punches-will-smith-slaps-chris-rock-at-the-oscars-and-twitterati-go-mad/articleshow/90490861.cms">Holding no punches – Will Smith slaps Chris Rock at the Oscars and Twitterati go mad</a> <a target="_blank" class="c-link c-message_attachment__title_link" href="https://www.businessinsider.in/business/corporates/news/covid-19-impact-leads-two-big-multiplexes-pvr-and-inox-to-merge/articleshow/90493472.cms">Harsh impact of COVID-19 leads two big multiplexes PVR and INOX to come together to save their castles</a>

Tesla boss Elon Musk says, 'We cannot let Putin take over Ukraine. This is crazy'

<div class="KonaFilter image-container display-table"><div><div class="image on-image">ReutersAmazon CEO Jeff Bezos.</div></div></div><ul class="summary-list"><li><a href="https://www.businessinsider.com/category/amazon?r=US&amp;IR=T">Amazon</a> CEO Jeff Bezos just sold around $1.8 billion worth of stock.</li><li>The sale of 965,612 shares represented 1.6% of his total holding in Amazon.</li><li>Bezos' net worth stands at $117 billion, according to the Bloomberg Billionaires Index.</li><li>The $1.8 billion could be used to help fund his space company, Blue Origin.</li><li><a href="https://www.businessinsider.com/?hprecirc-bullet">Visit Business Insider's homepage for more stories.</a></li></ul>Jeff Bezos just sold a whole bunch of Amazon stock.According to Amazon filings with the Securities and Exchange Commission on Wednesday night, Bezos dumped 965,612 shares in the final three days of July, at a value of around $1,900 per share.That means the world's richest man just bolstered his cash reserves by more than $1.8 billion. Bezos' total net worth stands at $117 billion, <a href="https://www.bloomberg.com/billionaires/">according to the Bloomberg Billionaires Index.</a><a href="https://www.forbes.com/sites/angelauyeung/2019/07/31/jeff-bezos-sells-about-18-billion-worth-of-amazon-shares-in-three-days/#bb64a2c4c36b">Forbes said the sell-off could be Bezos' largest in dollar value</a> since he founded Amazon in 1994 and grew the online retailer into a near-trillion dollar company.The 965,612 shares represented 1.6% of his total holding in Amazon, which now stands at 58,142,479 shares following the July sell-off.Read more: <a href="https://www.businessinsider.com/amazon-ceo-jeff-bezos-liquidates-billions-to-fund-blue-origin-2018-4?r=US&amp;IR=T">Jeff Bezos says he liquidates a whopping $1 billion of Amazon stock every year to pay for his rocket company, Blue Origin</a>Bezos said last year that he <a href="https://www.businessinsider.com/amazon-ceo-jeff-bezos-liquidates-billions-to-fund-blue-origin-2018-4?r=US&amp;IR=T">liquidates $1 billion of Amazon stock every year to pay for his rocket company, Blue Origin.</a> "The only way I can see to deploy this much financial resource is by converting my Amazon winnings into space travel," he said in an interview with Axel Springer CEO Mathias Dopfner.It is not known if the cash from his July sale will also be put towards Blue Origin. An Amazon spokesman did not immediately respond to Business Insider's request for comment.<a href="https://www.businessinsider.com/intelligence/40-big-tech-predictions-for-2019?IR=T&amp;itm_source=businessinsider&amp;itm_medium=ctgr_bii&amp;itm_term=ctgr_leadgen&amp;itm_content=amazon&amp;itm_campaign=40-big-tech-predictions-for-2019-2"></a> <div class="margin-top"> <h3>NOW WATCH: <a href="https://www.businessinsider.com/facebook-privacy-hacking-scandal-mark-zuckerberg-cambridge-analytica-2019-5">Facebook's scandals aren't enough for people to stop using it. Here's how the company has held up through data hacks, lawsuits, and massive security threats.</a></h3> <div> </div> </div>

Jeff Bezos just cashed in $1.8 billion worth of Amazon shares, in what could be his biggest stock sell-off ever

INTERVIEW: BioNTech founders Özlem Türeci and Ugur Sahin on developing the BioNTech-Pfizer COVID-19 vaccine, the future of fighting cancer, and whether people can live to 200

The inside story of Business Insider's $442 million sale to Axel Springer

Chhath Puja 2024 Wishes

Bank holidays in India

ChatGPT will let you create images for free

Should the government give freebies to the poor?

World’s most powerful passports

Jio vs Airtel vs Vi Prepaid Plans

You Searched For "Mathias Dopfner" and got 6 results

President of the European Commission: Here's what the EU is doing to limit the power of tech giants

Ursula von der Leyen

'Chutzpah,' manipulation, and 'fact-free polemics': Mathias Dopfner unloads on Silicon Valley after Europe votes to change the face of the internet

WELT

Tesla boss Elon Musk says, 'We cannot let Putin take over Ukraine. This is crazy'

IANS

Jeff Bezos just cashed in $1.8 billion worth of Amazon shares, in what could be his biggest stock sell-off ever

Jake Kanter,Jake Kanter

INTERVIEW: BioNTech founders Özlem Türeci and Ugur Sahin on developing the BioNTech-Pfizer COVID-19 vaccine, the future of fighting cancer, and whether people can live to 200

Mathias Döpfner

The inside story of Business Insider's $442 million sale to Axel Springer

Alyson Shontell

Popular Keywords

Buying Guides