Long-time Slashdot reader schwit1 writes: The Dubai-based startup LEAP71, focused on using AI software to quickly develop rocket engine designs it can then 3D print, has successfully test fired a prototype aerospike engine on December 18, 2024 during a static fire test campaign conducted in the United Kingdom.
Along the way they tackled a problem with bell-shaped rocket nozzles, writes New Atlas. "A rocket that works very well on liftoff will work less well as it rises in the atmosphere and the air pressure decreases. This is why second- and third-stage rocket engines are different from those of the first stage." Ideally, engineers want an engine that can adjust itself automatically to changes in air pressure. An aerospike does this by shaping the engine into a spike or plug with a curve like that of the inside of a rocket bell. As the combustion gases flow from the engine over the spike, the curve acts as one side of the bell and the surrounding air as the outside curve. As the air pressure changes, so does the shape of the virtual bell. There have been a number of aerospike engines developed since the 1950s and one has actually gone airborne, but there's still a long way to go when it comes to turning a promising idea into a practical space engine.

LEAP 71's contribution to the effort is to apply its Noyron Large Computational Engineering Model to the problem. It's an AI programmed and trained by aerospace experts to take a given set of input parameters and use them to create a design that meets those parameters by inferring physical interactions of various factors, including thermal behaviors and projected performance. The results of this are then fed back into the AI model to fine tune it as it presents computed performance parameters, the geometry of the engine, the parameters of the manufacturing process, and other details.
"Despite their clear advantages, Aerospikes are not used in space access today," LEAP 71's co-founder said in a statement. "We want to change that. Noyron allows us to radically cut the time we need to re-engineer and iterate after a test and enables us to converge rapidly on an optimal design."

Aerospikes "are more compact and significantly more efficient across various atmospheric pressures, including the vacuum of space," the company said this week — announcing the successful hot-firing of their Aerospike engine, and calling it "one of the most advanced and elusive rocket engines ever created..." By leveraging the power of Noyron's computational AI, the thruster was developed in a matter of weeks, manufactured as a monolithic piece of copper through industrial 3D printing, and put on the test stand, where it worked successfully on the first attempt...

The Aerospike was fired on December 18th, 2024, as part of a four-engines-in-four-days campaign conducted by LEAPâ71 at Airborne Engineering in Westcott, UK. The company will process the collected data to fine-tune Noyron for the next iteration of engines and continue testing in 2025, with the goal of making Aerospikes a viable option for modern spacecraft.

Long-time Slashdot reader theodp writes: Back in January, Rice University professor and former CACM Editor-in-Chief Moshe Y. Vardi wrote of the unintended consequences of social media and mobile computing in "Computing, You Have Blood on Your Hands!" To close out the year, Vardi addresses the role tech workers play in enabling dubious Big Tech business models — including now-powered-by-AI Big Tech Surveillance Capitalism — in an opinion piece titled "I Was Wrong about the Ethics Crisis."

Vardi writes: "The belief in the magical power of the free market always to serve the public good has no theoretical basis. In fact, our current climate crisis is a demonstrated market failure. To take an extreme example, Big Tobacco surely does not support the public good, and most of us would agree that it is unethical to work for Big Tobacco. The question, thus, is whether Big Tech is supporting the public good, and if not, what should Big Tech workers do about it. Of course, there is no simple answer to such a question, and the only reasonable answer to the question of whether it is ethical to work for Big Tech is, 'It depends.' [...] It is difficult to get a man to understand something, when his salary depends on his not understanding it, said the writer and political activist Upton Sinclair. By and large, Big Tech workers do not seem to be asking themselves hard questions, I believe, hence my conclusion that we do indeed suffer from an ethics crisis."

Business Insider reports: The lead researcher for Sam Altman's basic-income study says guaranteed no-strings payments are not a silver bullet for issues facing lower-income Americans. Elizabeth Rhodes, the research director for the Basic Income Project at Open Research, told Business Insider that while basic-income payments are "beneficial in many ways," the programs also have "clear limitations...."

Rhodes headed up one of the largest studies in the space, which focused specifically on those on low incomes rather than making universal payments to adults across all economic demographics. The three-year experiment, backed by OpenAI boss Altman, provided 1,000 low-income participants with $1,000 a month without any stipulations for how they could spend it.... The initial findings, released in July, found that recipients put the bulk of their extra spending toward basic needs such as rent, transportation, and food. They also worked less on average but remained engaged in the workforce and were more deliberate in their job searches compared with a control group. But Rhodes says the research reinforced how difficult it is to solve complex issues such as poverty or economic insecurity, and that there is "a lot more work to do."

The Altman-backed study is still reporting results. New findings released in December showed recipients valued work more after receiving the recurring monthly payments — a result that may challenge one of the main arguments against basic income payments. Participants also reported significant reductions in stress, mental distress, and food insecurity during the first year, though those effects faded by the second and third years of the program. "Poverty and economic insecurity are incredibly difficult problems to solve," Rhodes said. "The findings that we've had thus far are quite nuanced."

She added: "There's not a clear through line in terms of, this helps everyone, or this does that. It reinforced to me the idea that these are really difficult problems that, maybe, there isn't a singular solution."
In an earlier article coauthor David Broockman told Business Insider that the study's results might offer insights into how future programs could be successful — but said that the study's results didn't necessarily confirm the fears or hopes expressed by skeptics or supporters of a basic income.

Thanks to Slashdot reader jjslash for sharing the news.

A Linux Foundation project focused on understanding the health of the open source community just studied the outcomes for three projects that switched to "more restrictive" licenses and then faced community forks.

The data science director for the project — known as Community Health Analytics in Open Source Software (or CHAOSS) — is also an OpenUK board member, and describes the outcomes for OpenSearch, Redis with fork Valkey, and Terraform: The relicensed project (Redis) had significant numbers of contributors who were not employed by the company, and the fork (Valkey) was created by those existing contributors as a foundation project... The Redis project differs from Elasticsearch and Terraform in the number of contributions to the Redis repository from people who were not employees of Redis. In the year leading up to the relicense, when Redis was still open source, there were substantial contributions from employees of other companies: Twice as many non-Redis employees made five or more commits, and about a dozen employees of other companies made almost twice as many commits as Redis employees made.

In the six months after the relicense, all of the external contributors from companies (including Amazon, Alibaba, Tencent, Huawei and Ericsson) who contributed over five commits to the Redis project in the year prior to the relicense stopped contributing. In sum, Redis had strong organizational diversity before the relicense, but only Redis employees made significant contributions afterward.

Valkey was forked from Redis 7.2.4 on March 28, 2024, as a Linux Foundation project under the BSD-3 license. The fork was driven by a group of people who previously contributed to Redis with public support from their employers. Within its first six months, the Valkey repository had 29 contributors employed at 10 companies, and 18 of those people previously contributed to Redis. Valkey has a diverse set of contributors from various companies, with Amazon having the most contributors.
The results weren't always so clear-cut. Because Terraform always had very few contributors outside of the company, "there was no substantial impact on the contributor community from the relicensing event..." (Although the OpenTofu fork — a Linux Foundation project — had 31 people at 11 organizations who made five or more contributions.)

And both before and after Elasticsearch's relicensing, most contributors were Elastic employees, so "the 2021 relicense had little to no impact on contributors." (But the OpenSearch fork — transferred in September to the Linux Foundation — shows a more varied contributor base, with just 63% of additions and 64% of deletions coming from Amazon employees who made 10 or more commits. Six people who didn't work for Amazon made 10 or more commits, making up 11% of additions and 13% of deletions.")

So "Looking at all of these projects together, we see that the forks from relicensed projects tend to have more organizational diversity than the original projects," they conclude, adding that in general "projects with greater organizational diversity tend to be more sustainable..."

"You can dive into the details about these six projects in the paper, presentation and data we shared at the recent OpenForum Academy Symposium.

Magnus Carlsen quit the World Rapid Chess Championship on Friday, reports CNN, "after he refused to change out of the jeans he was wearing..."

"Carlsen, the world champion from 2013 until 2023, allegedly replied, 'I'm out, f*** you,' after being informed that he would not be permitted to continue," reports the Hindustan Times.

The International Chess Federation (or FIDE) "said in a statement that Carlsen breached the tournament's dress code by wearing jeans," reports CNN: As a result, Carlsen would not have been paired for round nine, though he could have returned for the rest of the tournament had he not decided to walk away, per Chess.com. Since he had performed poorly in the earlier rounds, there was little chance that Carlsen could have defended his title regardless....

The standoff became "a matter of principle" for Carlsen, he told chess channel Take Take Take. "I haven't appealed, honestly I'm too old at this point to care too much, if this is what they want to do ... nobody wants to back down, if this is where we are, that's fine by me," he said. "I'll probably head off to somewhere where the weather is a bit nicer than here and that's it." He explained that he had been at a lunch meeting before heading to the tournament's second day and "barely had time to go the room, change, put on a shirt, jacket and honestly I didn't even think about the jeans."
Carlsen was also fined $200, according to the article. He has now also withdrawn from the World Blitz Championship which follows this tournament.

In a statement, the FIDE said their dress code and other regulations "are designed to ensure professionalism and fairness for all participants," and that the federation "remains committed to promoting chess and its values, including respect for the rules that all participants agree to follow."

The group's CEO added "Rules are applicable to all the participants, and it would be unfair towards all players who respected the dress-code, and those who were previously fined." (They added that "We gave Magnus more than enough time to change. But as he had stated himself in his interview — it became a matter of principle for him.")

CNN notes that Carlsen has already won five world rapid and seven world blitz titles in the last 10 years...

Thursday New York's governor signed new legislation "to hold polluters responsible for the damage done to our environment" by establishing a Climate Superfund that's paid for by big fossil-fuel companies.

The money will be used for "climate change adaptation," according to New York state senator Liz Krueger, who notes that the legislation follows "the polluter-pays model" used in America's already-existing federal and state superfund laws. Spread out over 25 years, the legislation collects an average of $3 billion each year — or $75 billion — "from the parties most responsible for causing the climate crisis — big oil and gas companies."

"The Climate Change Superfund Act is now law, and New York has fired a shot that will be heard round the world: the companies most responsible for the climate crisis will be held accountable," said Senator Krueger. "Too often over the last decade, courts have dismissed lawsuits against the oil and gas industry by saying that the issue of climate culpability should be decided by legislatures. Well, the Legislature of the State of New York — the 10th largest economy in the world — has accepted the invitation, and I hope we have made ourselves very clear: the planet's largest climate polluters bear a unique responsibility for creating the climate crisis, and they must pay their fair share to help regular New Yorkers deal with the consequences.

"And there's no question that those consequences are here, and they are serious," Krueger continued. "Repairing from and preparing for extreme weather caused by climate change will cost more than half a trillion dollars statewide by 2050. That's over $65,000 per household, and that's on top of the disruption, injury, and death that the climate crisis is causing in every corner of our state. The Climate Change Superfund Act is a critical piece of affordability legislation that will deliver billions of dollars every year to ease the burden on regular New Yorkers...."

Starting in the 1970s, scientists working for Exxon made "remarkably accurate projections of just how much burning fossil fuels would warm the planet." Yet for years, "the oil giant publicly cast doubt on climate science, and cautioned against any drastic move away from burning fossil fuels, the main driver of climate change."
"The oil giant Saudi Aramco of Saudi Arabia could be slapped with the largest annual assessment of any company — $640 million a year — for emitting 31,269 million tons of greenhouse gases from 2000 to 2020," notes the New York Post.

And "The law will also standardize the number of emissions tied to the fuel produced by companies," reports the Times Union newspaper. "[F]or every 1 million pounds of coal, for example, the program assigns over 942 metric tons of carbon dioxide. For every 1 million barrels of crude oil, an entity is considered to have produced 432,180 metric tons of carbon dioxide." Among the infrastructure programs the superfund program aims to pay for: coastal wetlands restoration, energy efficient cooling systems in buildings, including schools and new housing developments, and stormwater drainage upgrades.
New York is now the second U.S. state with a "climate Superfund" law, according to Bloomberg Law, with New York following the lead of Vermont. "Maryland, Massachusetts, and California are also considering climate Superfund laws to manage mounting infrastructure costs." The American Petroleum Institute, which represents about 600 members of the industry, condemned the law. "This type of legislation represents nothing more than a punitive new fee on American energy, and we are evaluating our options moving forward," an API spokesperson said in an emailed statement... The bills — modeled after the federal Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Act, known as Superfund — would almost certainly spur swift litigation from fossil fuel companies upon enactment, legal educators say.

Slashdot reader DevNull127 writes: This year the London Stock Exchange got a new listing for "Raspberry Pi Holdings plc." It's the computer-making commercial subsidiary of their larger educational charity, the Raspberry Pi Foundation. "Access to the public market will enable us to build more of the products you love, faster," explained CEO Eben Upton in June. And in May Foundation head Philip Colligan added that beyond the $50 million already donated to their educational charity by the commercial subsidiary, the IPO would allow the conversion of some stock sales to "an endowment that we will use to fund our educational programmes... The Foundation will use any funds that we raise through the sale of shares at the IPO — or subsequently — to advance our ambitious global strategy to enable every young person to realise their full potential through the power of computing and digital technologies."

So how's that working out? A finance site called Proactive Investors UK reports that in September Raspbery Pi Holdings plc "reported underlying profits (EBITDA) of US$20.9 million, up by 55% from a year ago, on revenues up 61% to US$144 million... The Pi 5 single-board computer (SBC), launched at the end of last October [2023], sold 1.1 million units in the first half, with overall unit growth at 31%."

And then in December its stock price suddenly shot up to more than double where it was at the end of November — giving Raspbery Pi Holdings plc a valuation "just under £1.3 billion."

ewhac (Slashdot reader #5,844) writes: Retraction Watch is reporting that the entire editorial staff (save one) for the Journal of Human Evolution has resigned in protest over creeping harmful changes imposed by its publisher, Elsevier.

In an open letter posted to social media, the editors recount Elsevier's changes to their journal's scientific and editorial processes (inserting itself into those processes) — along with staff and budget reductions negatively impacting their ability to review and publish submissions. The letter alleges that when the editorial board complained of Elsevier's eliminating support for a copy editor, Elsevier responded that the editors shouldn't be paying attention to language, grammar, readability, consistency, or accuracy of proper nomenclature or formatting. When the editors fiercely protested Elsevier's ending of JHE's dual-editor model, Elsevier allegedly responded that it would support a dual-editor model by cutting the compensation rate by half.

But perhaps most damning is a footnote revealing Elsevier's use of so-called "AI" in the publication process. "In fall of 2023, for example, without consulting or informing the editors, Elsevier initiated the use of AI during production, creating article proofs devoid of capitalization of all proper nouns (e.g., formally recognized epochs, site names, countries, cities, genera, etc.) as well italics for genera and species. These AI changes reversed the accepted versions of papers that had already been properly formatted by the handling editors. This was highly embarrassing for the journal and resolution took six months and was achieved only through the persistent efforts of the editors. AI processing continues to be used and regularly reformats submitted manuscripts to change meaning and formatting and require extensive author and editor oversight during proof stage."

Except for one unnamed associate editor, the editorial board for the Journal of Human Evolution determined that the situation with Elsevier was no longer tenable, and resigned.

Valerie Warner is 71 years old — and owes $268,000 in student loans.

Roughly 40 years ago she went to law school, but was only able to find work as a legal aid and later work in the public school system, which the Washington Post calls "a rewarding job but one that didn't pay enough to wipe out her loans." Later she earned a masters of education degree: All told, Warner borrowed a total of about $60,000 for her two advanced degrees. The amount seemed reasonable given the career trajectory that both credentials promised, but that path never materialized. Working a series of low-wage jobs, she went in and out of forbearance before ultimately defaulting. The balance ballooned to the current $268,000 total over the years due to collection fees and interest capitalization.
And she's not the only one in debt. "On a dreary December afternoon, a group of senior citizens stood in the rain outside the Education Department pleading for relief from a debt that many fear will burden them for the rest of their lives..." Some sat in rocking chairs, cross-stitching their debt number in a pattern. Others held signs that read, "Time is running out, sunset our debt." Or wore T-shirts saying, "Debt relief before we die...."

[A]ctivists are urging the U.S. Education Department to discharge the student debt of older borrowers who they say are in no position to repay. They say the department could use a little-known federal statute that considers a person's ability to pay within a reasonable time and the inability of the government to collect the debt in full. There are 2.8 million federal student loan borrowers aged 62 and older with a total of $121.5 billion in debt, more than 726,300 of them over the age of 71, according to the Education Department. Older borrowers are one of the fastest-growing segments of the government's student loan portfolio, and their Social Security benefits are subject to garnishment...

The Education Department would only acknowledge receiving a memo from the Debt Collective, the group organizing the campaign, outlining the agency's authority to cancel the debt of older borrowers. The activist organization said it has been meeting with members of Congress, White House committees and Education Department officials about the matter since September. "Many of these folks have been borrowers for 20 or 30 years, with punishingly high interest rates. Their balances and the way they have dragged on for decades is just an indictment of the broken system and the failure of past relief efforts," said Eleni Schirmer, an organizer with the Debt Collective... According to the think tank New America, the number of Americans approaching retirement age with student loan debt has skyrocketed over 500 percent in the last two decades. Some have loans they took out to finance their college educations, while others took out federal Parent Plus loans or co-signed private loans for their children.
The article points out that the U.S. government will garnish up to 15 percent of the Social Security income to recoup student loan debt, even if it means leaving recipients below the poverty line.

But it also includes this quote from Adam Minsky, an attorney who specializes in student debt, about the prospects for federal action that survives challenges in the U.S. court system. "[A]s a practical matter, I don't think that judges and courts that have been hostile to mass debt relief would treat this differently from other programs that have been blocked or struck down."

An anonymous reader quotes a report from TechCrunch: Lyft is suing the city of San Francisco, claiming the city unfairly charged the ride-hailing company over $100 million in taxes, Bloomberg reports. The lawsuit alleges that, over the course of five years, San Francisco unfairly labeled money earned by Lyft drivers as company revenue. In the complaint, Lyft maintains that its drivers are its customers, not employees. "Accordingly, Lyft recognizes revenue from rideshare as being comprised of fees paid to Lyft by drivers, not charges paid by riders to drivers," the complaint reads.

A new report reveals that the VW Group left sensitive data for 800,000 electric vehicles from Audi, VW, Seat, and Skoda poorly secured on an Amazon cloud, exposing precise GPS locations, battery statuses, and user habits for months. Carscoops reports: It gets worse. A more tech-savvy user could reportedly connect vehicles to their owners' personal credentials, thanks to additional data accessible through VW Group's online services Crucially, in 466,000 of the 800,000 cases, the location data was so precise that anyone with access could create a detailed profile of each owner's daily habits. As reported by Spiegel, the massive list of affected owners isn't just a who's-who of regular folks. It includes German politicians, entrepreneurs, Hamburg police officers (the entire EV fleet, no less), and even suspected intelligence service employees. Yes, even spies may have been caught up in this digital debacle.

This glaring error originated from Cariad, a VW Group company that focuses on software, due to an error that occurred in the summer of 2024. An anonymous whistleblower used freely accessible software to dig up the sensitive information and promptly alerted Chaos Computer Club (CCC), Europe's largest hacker association. CCC wasted no time contacting Lower Saxony's State Data Protection Officer, the Federal Ministry of the Interior, and other security bodies. They also gave VW Group and Cariad 30 days to address the issue before going public. According to CCC, Cariad's technical team "responded quickly, thoroughly and responsibly," blocking unauthorized access to its customers' data.

Accidental missile attacks on commercial airliners have become the leading cause of aviation fatalities in recent years (Warning: source paywalled; alternative source), driven by rising global conflicts and the proliferation of advanced antiaircraft weaponry. Despite improvements in aviation safety overall, inconsistent risk assessments, political complexities, and rapid military escalations make protecting civilian flights in conflict zones increasingly difficult. The Wall Street Journal reports: The crash Wednesday of an Azerbaijan Airlines jetliner in Kazakhstan, if officially confirmed as a midair attack, would be the third major fatal downing of a passenger jet linked to armed conflict since 2014, according to the Flight Safety Foundation's Aviation Safety Network, a global database of accidents and incidents. The tally would bring to more than 500 the number of deaths from such attacks during that period. Preliminary results of Azerbaijan's investigation into the crash indicate the plane was hit by a Russian antiaircraft missile, or shrapnel from it, said people briefed on the probe.

"It adds to the worrying catalog of shootdowns now," said Andy Blackwell, an aviation risk adviser at security specialist ISARR and former head of security at Virgin Atlantic. "You've got the conventional threats, from terrorists and terrorist groups, but now you've got this accidental risk as well." No other cause of aviation fatalities on commercial airliners comes close to shootdowns over those years, according to ASN data. The deadliness of such attacks is a dramatic shift: In the preceding 10 years, there were no fatal shootdowns of scheduled commercial passenger flights, ASN data show. The trend highlights the difficulty -- if not impossibility -- of protecting civilian aviation in war zones, even for rigorous aviation regulators, because of the politics of war. Early last century similar woes plagued sea travel, when belligerents targeted ocean transport.

Increasing civilian aviation deaths from war also reflect both a growing number of armed conflicts internationally and the increasing prevalence of powerful antiaircraft weaponry. If a missile was indeed the cause of this week's disaster, it would mean that the three deadliest shootdowns of the past decade all involved apparently unintended targetings of passenger planes flying near conflict zones, by forces that had been primed to hit enemy military aircraft. Two of those incidents were linked to Russia: Wednesday's crash of an Embraer E190 with 67 people aboard, of whom 38 died, and the midair destruction in 2014 of a Malaysia Airlines Boeing 777 flying over a battle zone in Ukraine, on which all 298 people aboard died. The other major downing was the mistaken shooting in 2020 by Iranian forces of a Ukraine International Airlines Boeing 737 departing Tehran, killing all 176 people onboard. Iran's missile defense systems had been on alert for a potential U.S. strike at the time.

An anonymous reader quotes a report from The Independent: The two professions associated with the lowest levels of death due to Alzheimer's disease may be surprising. Taxi and ambulance drivers were found to have the lowest proportion of deaths of more than 440 occupations that were considered in a new observation-based study from Massachusetts physicians. Alzheimer's disease is a type of dementia that affects memory, thinking, and behavior. It impacts millions of Americans and is one of the top 10 causes of death in the US.

While the study's findings cannot confirm a direct link between the professions and reduced risk, its researchers said they raise the possibility that memory-intensive driving occupations could be associated with some protection. "We view these findings not as conclusive, but as hypothesis-generating," they said, noting that no resolute conclusions can be drawn about cause and effect. The jobs require frequent spatial and navigational processing: the ability to sense and incorporate information about the location of objects around them. Although, the trend was not seen in other related jobs, like driving a bus or piloting an aircraft. It was also not seen in other forms of dementia, which suggests changes in the hippocampus region of the brain -- which is used for spatial memory and navigation -- may account for the reduction.

The hippocampus, located deep within the brain, has been shown to be enhanced in London taxi drivers compared to the general population. The region is also one of the parts of the brain involved in the development of Alzheimer's disease. [...] The authors acknowledged that there were limitations, including that individuals who are at higher risk of developing Alzheimer's disease may be less likely to enter driving occupations. However, they said this is unlikely because disease symptoms typically develop after working age. "Further research is necessary to definitively conclude whether the spatial cognitive work required for these occupations affects the risk of death from Alzheimer's disease and whether any cognitive activities can be potentially preventive," they said. The research has been published in the journal The BMJ.

BrianFagioli shares a report from BetaNews: It might sound unbelievable, but the human brain processes information at just 10 bits per second! Yes, folks, that's slower than the internet speeds many of us endured during the early days of dial-up. While our senses take in billions of bits of data every second, our brain intelligently sifts through the chaos, letting through only what's important.

This is no accident. Researchers Jieyu Zheng and Markus Meister explain in their study, The Unbearable Slowness of Being, that the brain is built this way for survival. Instead of getting overwhelmed by a flood of details, the brain has a system to focus on what matters most. It ensures we act quickly and effectively without being bogged down by unnecessary information. [...] The slow pace of the human brain might seem like a drawback in today's fast-paced world, but it has been sufficient for survival throughout human history. Evolution prioritized efficiency over speed, enabling the brain to focus on critical tasks without wasting energy. While machines continue to outpace us in raw processing power, the human brain remains unmatched in its ability to prioritize and adapt. The study raises an important question: Why does a brain capable of such complexity operate at such a slow rate?

jjslash shares a report from TechSpot: A Valve employee recently provided PC Gamer with a rough calculation of the company's per-employee income, revealing that Valve generates more money per person than several of the world's largest companies. While the data is a few years old and doesn't account for some significant recent trends in the tech sector, Valve's ranking in this metric likely hasn't shifted much over that time. Exact figures for Valve's per-hour and per-employee net income remain redacted. However, a chart from 2018 confirms that Valve's per-employee income exceeded that of companies like Facebook, Apple, Netflix, Alphabet/Google, Microsoft, Intel, and Amazon. Facebook ranks second with a high revenue per employee of $780,400 annually, or $89 per hour, surpassing competitors like Apple and Microsoft due to its relatively smaller workforce of under 70,000. Amazon, by contrast, with over 1.5 million employees, earns significantly less per employee at $15,892 annually, or $1.81 per hour.

Further reading: Valve Runs Its Massive PC Gaming Ecosystem With Only About 350 Employees