Monthly Archives: June 2023

Tech giants Microsoft and Alphabet/Google have seized a large lead in shaping our potentially A.I.-dominated future. This is not good news. History has shown us that when the distribution of information is left in the hands of a few, the result is political and economic oppression. Without intervention, this history will repeat itself.

In just a few months, Microsoft broke speed records in establishing ChatGPT, a form of generative artificial intelligence that it plans to invest $10 billion into, as a household name. And last month, Sundar Pichai, C.E.O. of Alphabet/Google, unveiled a suite of A.I. tools including for email, spreadsheets and drafting all manner of text. While there is some discussion as to whether Metas recent decision to give away its A.I. computer code will accelerate its progress, the reality is that all competitors to Alphabet and Microsoft remain far behind.

The fact that these companies are attempting to outpace each other, in the absence of externally imposed safeguards, should give the rest of us even more cause for concern, given the potential for A.I. to do great harm to jobs, privacy and cybersecurity. Arms races without restrictions generally do not end well.

History has repeatedly demonstrated that control over information is central to who has power and what they can do with it. At the beginning of writing in ancient Mesopotamia, most scribes were the sons of elite families, primarily because education was expensive. In medieval Europe, the clergy and nobility were much more likely to be literate than ordinary people, and they used this advantage to reinforce their social standing and legitimacy.

Literacy rates rose alongside industrialization, although those who decided what the newspapers printed and what people were allowed to say on the radio, and then on television, were hugely powerful. But with the rise of scientific knowledge and the spread of telecommunications came a time of multiple sources of information and many rival ways to process facts and reason out implications. Access to facts about the outside world weakened and ultimately helped to destroy Soviet control over Poland, Hungary, East Germany and the rest of its former sphere of influence.

Starting in the 1990s, the internet offered even lower-cost ways to express opinions. But over time the channels of communication concentrated into a few hands including Facebook, whose algorithm exacerbated political polarization and in some well-documented cases also fanned the flames of ethnic hatred. In authoritarian regimes, such as China, the same technologies have turned into tools of totalitarian control.

With the emergence of A.I., we are about to regress even further. Some of this has to do with the nature of the technology. Instead of assessing multiple sources, people are increasingly relying on the nascent technology to provide a singular, supposedly definitive answer. There is no easy way to access the footnotes or links that let users explore the underlying sources.

This technology is in the hands of two companies that are philosophically rooted in the notion of machine intelligence, which emphasizes the ability of computers to outperform humans in specific activities. Deep Mind, a company now owned by Google, is proud of developing algorithms that can beat human experts at games such as chess and Go.

This philosophy was naturally amplified by a recent (bad) economic idea that the singular objective of corporations should be to maximize short-term shareholder wealth. Combined together, these ideas are cementing the notion that the most productive applications of A.I. replace humankind. Doing away with grocery store clerks in favor of self-checkout kiosks does very little for the productivity of those who remain employed, for example, while also annoying many customers. But it makes it possible to fire workers and tilt the balance of power further in favor of management.

We believe the A.I. revolution could even usher in the dark prophecies envisioned by Karl Marx over a century ago. The German philosopher was convinced that capitalism naturally led to monopoly ownership over the means of production and that oligarchs would use their economic clout to run the political system and keep workers poor.

Fortunately, Marx was wrong about the 19th-century industrial age that he inhabited. Industries emerged much faster than he expected, and new firms disrupted the economic power structure. Countervailing social powers developed in the form of trade unions and genuine political representation for a broad swath of society. And governments developed the ability to regulate industrial excesses. The result was greater competition, higher wages and more robust democracies.

Today, those countervailing forces either dont exist or are greatly weakened. Generative A.I. requires even deeper pockets than textile factories and steel mills. As a result, most of its obvious opportunities have already fallen into the hands of Microsoft, with its market capitalization of $2.4 trillion, and Alphabet, worth $1.6 trillion.

At the same time, powers like trade unions have been weakened by 40 years of deregulation ideology (Ronald Reagan, Margaret Thatcher, two Bushes and even Bill Clinton). For the same reason, the U.S. governments ability to regulate anything larger than a kitten has withered. Extreme polarization and fear of killing the golden (donor) goose or undermining national security mean that most members of Congress would still rather look away.

To prevent data monopolies from ruining our lives, we need to mobilize effective countervailing power and fast.

Congress needs to assert individual ownership rights over underlying data that is relied on to build A.I. systems. If Big A.I. wants to use our data, we want something in return to address problems that communities define and to raise the true productivity of workers. Rather than machine intelligence, what we need is machine usefulness, which emphasizes the ability of computers to augment human capabilities. This would be a much more fruitful direction for increasing productivity. By empowering workers and reinforcing human decision making in the production process, it also would strengthen social forces that can stand up to big tech companies. It would also require a greater diversity of approaches to new technology, thus making another dent in the monopoly of Big A.I.

We also need regulation that protects privacy and pushes back against surveillance capitalism, or the pervasive use of technology to monitor what we do including whether we are in compliance with acceptable behavior, as defined by employers and how the police interpret the law, and which can now be assessed in real time by A.I. There is a real danger that A.I. will be used to manipulate our choices and distort lives.

Finally, we need a graduated system for corporate taxes, so that tax rates are higher for companies when they make more profit in dollar terms. Such a tax system would put shareholder pressure on tech titans to break themselves up, thus lowering their effective tax rate. More competition would help by creating a diversity of ideas and more opportunities to develop a pro-human direction for digital technologies.

If these companies prefer to remain in one piece, the elevated tax on their profits can finance public goods, particularly education, that will help people cope with new technology and support a more pro-human direction for technology, work and democracy.

Our future should not be left in the hands of two powerful companies that build ever larger global empires based on using our collective data without scruple and without compensation.

Daron Acemoglu and Simon Johnson are professors at M.I.T. They are the authors of Power and Progress: Our 1,000-Year Struggle Over Technology and Prosperity.

The Times is committed to publishing a diversity of letters to the editor. Wed like to hear what you think about this or any of our articles. Here are some tips. And heres our email: letters@nytimes.com.

Follow The New York Times Opinion section on Facebook, Twitter (@NYTopinion) and Instagram.

See more here:

Opinion | Big Tech Is Bad. Big A.I. Will Be Worse. - The New York Times

Denmark is looking to implement a measure to limit the collection of childrens data by major technology companies, reported Reuters, citing Denmark Business Minister Morten Bodskov

The Danish government intends to raise the minimum age to between 15 and 16 years at which children can provide permission to share personal information with technology companies. Currently, the minimum age limit is 13 years.

Additionally, in order to use data from children younger than that, the companies will need parental approval.

The tech giants must take greater responsibility, Bodskov was quoted by the news agency as saying.

We must put an end to their opaque algorithms, which use crazy methods to keep children and adults in front of the screen and harvest unimaginable amounts of personal information.

The move comes as several European nations from Hungary to Lithuania and the Netherlands are working on laws with a similar intent.

Germany has already established 16 years as the minimum age.

Meanwhile, the US is working on an online privacy bill to ban the unauthorised collection of personal data on users aged 16 years or younger.

Additionally, businesses would have to give young people the option to delete their personal data.

Denmarks efforts are based on suggestions made by an expert council and are expected to become law later this year.

The business ministry stated that they would also strive to implement age-verification methods on websites and applications to keep kids away from sensitive information.

Recently, Microsoft and Amazon agreed to pay millions in penalties to settle US Federal Trade Commissions charges of alleged violations of childrens privacy law.

Read more here:

Denmark to curb children's data collection by tech giants - Verdict

Illustration: Ada Amer/Axios

The push to get employees into the office on a hybrid schedule is getting more aggressive.

Why it matters: As the labor market softens, especially in tech, employers are pushing harder on in-person attendance.

The big picture: Tech companies were once outspoken remote work boosters. That changed after layoffs rocked the industry swinging the balance of power in favor of management.

What's happening: In a company-wide email last week, Google chief people officer Fiona Cicconi told staff that office attendance will be considered in their performance reviews, the WSJ first reported.

State of play: Google, a unit of tech giant Alphabet, had already asked employees to come in three days a week back in April. Many ignored the request, according to the Washington Post.

Zoom in: The law firm Davis Polk and banking giant JPMorgan also consider in-office attendance as a component of performance reviews.

Yes, but: The push by tech companies to get employees into offices has been driven by Silicon Valley giants. Smaller tech firms have been more likely to stick with remote work policies.

What to watch: How workers react. Recall, hundreds of Amazon employees walked out of the job over return-to-office mandates last month.

Read the original here:

Companies get aggressive with return-to-office policies - Axios

Illustration: Ada Amer/Axios

Meta and Microsoft joined a group working on a framework to promote responsible practices in the development, creation and sharing of media created by AI, per an announcement Wednesday shared first with Axios.

Driving the news: The two tech giants, both pushing forward with respective generative AI projects, are joining the Partnership on AI group working on the framework, with plans to meet later this month to discuss recommendations and case studies.

What they're saying: "Meta and Microsoft reach billions of people daily with creative content that is rapidly evolving," Claire Leibowicz, head of AI and media integrity at the Partnership on AI, said in a statement.

Be smart: Founding members of the framework, first launched in February, include Adobe, Bumble, OpenAI, TikTok, BBC, the Canadian Broadcasting Company and WITNESS, a human rights and technology group.

Our thought bubble: Tech industry groups generally gather together to establish best practices and guidelines to head off the imposition of more formal regulation.

See more here:

Meta and Microsoft join AI standards group on "synthetic media" - Axios

Banking, manufacturing and pharmaceuticals firms are on the rise as prospective employers among third-level students, but tech multinationals have lost some ground, according to the latest Most Attractive Employers Index Ireland from IrishJobs.ie's Universum.

Highly publicised job losses and general uncertainty across the tech sector have had a knock-on effect on student preferences, although the likes of Google, Apple and Intel were generally in the top-ranked companies among imminent graduates.

Among Business & Economics students, Google and Apple placed first and second ahead of KPMG and PwC, with Microsoft completing the top five, falling one place from the previous survey.

JP Morgan was sixth, while Deloitte fell two places to seventh, and EY climbed two to eight. Goldman Sachs and new entrant TikTok filled the last two places in the top 10.

Outside the top 10, Bank of Ireland (12th), the Central Bank (up six to 13th), and Bank of America (+7 to 18th) all gained places while Amazon (-4 to 11th) and Facebook (-11 to 19th) both declined following mass layoffs.

Among Engineering students, Intel retained top spot, but Pfizer leapfrogged Google and Apple into second, while Microsoft fell from third to seventh behind Boston Scientific and Jacobs Engineering. Johnson & Johnson and Aer Lingus were static at eighth and ninth and ESB rose one to 10th.

There was some movement in top six most attractive employers among IT students, with Google unchanged at number one, while Apple overtook Microsoft for second and fourth-placed Intel placed ahead of Amazon and Facebook. Dell Technologies rose two places to seventh, and TikTok entered the list at nine, with Activision Blizzard in 10th.

Moreover, when it comes to the size of organisations where IT students want to work, large companies are down by 12% on last year, while small to medium-sized organisations increased by the same percentage.

Pfizer, J&J and Boston Scientific were the top three preferred employers of Natural Sciences students ahead of Glanbia, which swapped placed with the HSE, while Google, MSD, Regeneron, Kerry Group and Intel also made the list.

The Department of Education is favoured by Humanities students ahead of Google, RT, the HSE, and TikTok, which placed for the first time in 5th, with Apple, the Civil Service, Microsoft, An GardaSochna and Virgin Media all falling one place as a result.

The HSE and Pfizer were unmoved as the top two among Health & Medicine students as Vhi Healthcare overtook J&J for third and Laya Healthcare rose from eighth to fifth, consigning Boston Scientific and Boots to sixth and seventh. MedTech firm Medtronic surged from 16th to eighth, ahead of Abbott and the Department of Education.

Finally, among Law students, A&L Goodbody retained the top spot, and the Department of Justice fell from second to fourth behind Arthur Cox and Matheson. William Fry took fifth ahead of Google, and McCann Fitzgerald was unchanged in seventh ahead of risers Apple, Hayes Solicitors, and JP Morgan.

"Last year, with their reputation for innovation and also jobsecurity, global technology multinationals dominated the rankings," said Steve Ward, UK and Ireland business director at Universum.

"In 2023, however, it looks like headlines around job losses at major tech companies, many of whom have their European headquarters here in Ireland, have begun to impact on student preferences. For example, were seeing Business & Economics students return in greater numbers to their traditional homes in auditing and accounting. Banking institutions have also enjoyed a resurgence in popularity among this cohort.

Tech multinationals have also lost some ground among Engineering students this year, while manufacturing, construction and pharmaceutical companies have all moved up the ranks. Meanwhile, although Google, Apple and Microsoft continue to be the top three employers for IT students, we are seeing some interesting movement towards SMEs, which suggests that smaller, local companies are playing a role in helping to pick up surplus digital talent.

In terms of the companies making the greatest gains, Tesco increases its standing among IT and Natural Sciences students by 20 and 30 places, respectively, and Adobe shot up 27 places among Engineering students and by 11 places among Business & Economics students.

Penneysalso made large gains, rising 48 places among IT students and 14 places among Engineering students. In addition to TikTok, new entrants includeBus ireannandWorkday, withBus ireannis faring better among Engineering and IT students andWorkdayproving popular among IT and Business students.

(Pic: Getty Images)

The rest is here:

Students warier of tech giants as prospective employers following ... - Business Plus

A top consumer group was seen savaging the big tech community for laying down misleading crypto advertisements across top social media apps.

The news comes after a complaint was sent out to top consumer officials as well as the European Commission. This ended up causing major regulatory actions to be taken to prevent such actions from taking place, amid huge pressure from the international community.

Officials want to crack down against those whose main purpose is to deceive others to achieve their own gains while keeping a check on the international community of consumers.

Today, the ECO was seen filing complaints alongside the EC regarding such deceiving ads of crypto that continued to multiply across various social media platforms.

For those who may not be aware, crypto investments are very volatile and tend to keep users vulnerable to major risks and harms such as scams and even the chance to lose major sums of revenue.

While we are well aware of the major risks that this does end up surrounding, people are still willing to conduct investments in the world of crypto. Its shocking to see how so many consumers are very aware of the mega dangers attached but they continue to market crypto products on different apps. Did we mention how influencers are taking huge sums of money to promote such products but fail to disclose them in the open?

The tagline involves how to get rich in a quick manner through ads and investments as well as social media influencers who again play a leading role in terms of convincing audience members.

This is why so many regulators functioning at the EU level are trying to put out strict policies across apps regarding such marketing strategies while taking necessary steps to stop those misleading others for their own benefit.

The group is also forcing authorities in Europe to work alongside various financial watchdogs and stop the crypto promotion.

Now, regulators may work on complaints against these apps or they could promote regulatory action to ban firms or place sanctions on them to force them to alter their practices. Its not quite clear if theyll opt to do this or when such a decision would be implemented.

The world of crypto is certainly not something new but the interest surrounding it has really expanded in the past few years. And that is why officials are now scrambling in terms of regulating what is taking place behind the scenes before its too late.

Continued here:

Big Tech Giants TikTok, YouTube, And Twitter Savaged For ... - Digital Information World

Google is using artificial intelligence in its online shopping tool to show how clothing from online retailers will fit different body types, the company said Wednesday. It's another move in Google's push to incorporate generative AI -- or AI that can create content based on training data when prompted -- across its range of products and online services.

The new Google shopping feature, which launches today with brands like Anthropologie, Everlane, H&M and Loft, uses AI to generate an image of the article of clothing on a real model, with the goal being to show how clothing sizes look on actual people. It's the latest effort by major Internet companies and retailers, including Amazon and Walmart, to upgrade the home shopping and virtual try-on experience.

While Google is using AI to generate imagery of the desired article of clothing, it uses real people to show how that clothing fits. Shyam Sunder, a group product manager at Google responsible for the virtual try-on feature, said at a press briefing that the company hired 80 models (40 women and 40 men) to create this shopping option.

Sunder said Google only needs one image of an article of clothing from a retailer's website to create an AI-crafted representation of that item on a model. Google's technology can show how the material would "drape, fold, cling, stretch and form wrinkles and shadows," Lilian Rincon, Google's senior director of consumer shopping product, wrote in a company blog post. Google will support women's tops at launch with this feature, but says it plans to expand to other categories as well.

In a demonstration, multiple models with different body types were also shown for each size option. The company said it selected models with different skin tones and whose clothing sizes range from double extra small to quadruple extra large. In addition to browsing through sizes, you'll also be able to find similar products in different prices, colors and patterns.

An example of Google's new shopping feature showing how a green top from Everlane looks on different women.

Tech and retail giants in the past have attempted to make the process of trying on clothes easier. Last year, Walmart announced a feature that's very similar to Google's. Called Choose My Model, it lets users pick from among 50 models of different heights, sizes, body shapes and skin tones to see how clothing would look. Amazon also announced a virtual try-on feature for shoes last year.

But Google's announcement reflects the broader shift among tech giants to embrace generative AI and infuse it into their most important products. Google's I/O developers conference, which is where the company typically provides updates on new products and technologies, was all about AI. (In fact, the company mentioned the word AI more than 140 times during its keynote address.)

Microsoft has also made the technology a major focus in products like Bing and Windows. Amazon is also reportedly working on a new ChatGPT-style search for its sprawling store, according to Bloomberg.

Editors' note: CNET is using an AI engine to help create some stories. For more, seethis post.

Original post:

Google Is Using AI to Show How Clothes Look on Real People ... - CNET

De Graaf said Europes head start on AI rules will make it tough for the U.K. to craft an alternate approach in time for it to matter. But White said the EUs strict safeguards could shut out certain types of AI or chill their use on the continent. If that happens, it would give London an opportunity to make its mark.

The companies were talking about are U.K. and U.S. companies, White said. Thats really where I think a lot of this will play out, in terms of what theyre doing and the governments that they listen to.

The U.S. tech industry is intrigued by Whites sales pitch, and its lobbyists are staffing up as they prepare for a potential new power center in London.

It is not surprising that someone might look at how certain legislative efforts have fared on the continent and conclude that a different approach might have more value, said Matthew Schruers, president of the Computer and Communications Industry Association. Schruers lobbying firm is in the process of opening a new London office, and its not the only Silicon Valley operation making moves to the U.K. on Sunday, venture capital firm Andreessen Horowitz announced plans to open its first international office in London.

But even if it can nudge the U.S. toward its preferred tech rules, there are domestic issues that could undercut the U.K.s message to Silicon Valley. The countrys next general election, expected sometime in 2024, could push the regulation-averse Conservatives out of power. And many U.K. voters and advocacy groups disagree with Londons light-touch approach to tech.

That tension has forced the U.K. government into a tricky balancing act between attracting industry while also addressing voter anxiety. And Silicon Valley is so far skeptical that Londons tech plans are much friendlier than the rules now coming from Brussels.

To say were a better bet than the EU, which has basically completely stifled its tech sector, is faint praise at best, said one industry source, who requested anonymity to discuss the sensitive interplay between global tech regulators.

If White can get Silicon Valley to work closely with London on new rules (and if London can convince Washington or enough U.S. states to take those rules and run with them), it could mean an end to the EUs regulatory dominance over an industry that increasingly transcends borders.

But even a successful effort would see the U.K. subordinated at some level to the U.S. and its far from clear that White and his government can actually deliver.

A decade ago, none of this would have even made sense. The U.K. was firmly ensconced in the EU, and the tech industry was a lightly regulated, high-growth sector that everyone loved. The main way for foreign jurisdictions to attract U.S. tech firms was to offer lower taxes, which led to a massive rush of headquarters to business-friendly Ireland.

But starting with the EUs adoption of its landmark General Data Protection Regulation in 2016, the bloc has passed a series of laws that crack down on the tech companies use of personal data, rein in their monopoly power, expand the protections they provide users and govern their plans for AI.

The flurry of activity opened a gulf with Washington, where big tech while often a political punching bag saw little in the way of actual regulation by Congress.

See original here:

Joe White is leading the British charm offensive in Silicon Valley - POLITICO

ZURICH, June 14, 2023 /PRNewswire/ -- Switzerland is home to a globally unique life science cluster. In addition to multinational companies like Novartis and Roche, this encompasses a dense network of startups and SMEs. Its renowned universities, strong intellectual property protection and strategic location in the middle of Europe have made Switzerland a preferred site for global and regional pharma headquarters. There is a strong ecosystem in place that feeds a dynamic talent pool and provides companies with an important advantage: All parts of the value chain from R&D to manufacturing, through to commercialization can be accessed in one location.

SWITZERLAND A THRIVING HUB FOR PERSONALIZED HEALTH

At the same time, the pragmatic and business-friendly legislation has attracted fastgrowing tech companies that develop high-quality "Swiss made" products. For companies who wish to quickly and easily bring new innovations in personalized health to market, Switzerland offers the ideal environment.

THE ADVANTAGES OF SWITZERLAND

1. High Innovation Output

A steady stream of highly qualified talent and scientists in Switzerland make a significant contribution towards developing new medicines. The framework conditions are also in place: The Swiss healthcare system supports the introduction of new medicines and, in doing so, offers companies access to a sophisticated test and sales market.

Why Switzerland:

2. Life Sciences Value Chain in One Place

With its long tradition in life sciences and a strong infrastructure in advanced manufacturing, Switzerland offers a dense and experienced network of peers, universities and suppliers over a geographically manageable terrain. It is precisely because Switzerland is a small country that industry benefits from this experienced cluster along the entire value chain to develop, produce and market new products and services all in one place.

Why Switzerland:

3. Strategic Location in the Heart of Europe

With its strong life sciences clusters and a business-friendly environment, Switzerland has become a favored headquarter location for pharmaceutical companies expanding into Europe for the first time. Its thriving ecosystem provides partnering and licensing opportunities, and the country's geographical position helps access the European market efficiently.

Why Switzerland:

4. First-Class Technology

Swiss authorities are pragmatic and business-friendly, which has led to pioneering regulations in the field of emerging technologies such as blockchain, robotics, or AI. This has attracted global talent and fast-growing tech companies that develop high-quality products.

Why Switzerland:

Case Studies

Home

Business Location Switzerland

Business Location Switzerland is a collaboration among key stakeholders across Switzerland to recruit businesses from North America with a focus on the personalized health space. In the U.S., we have locations in Washington, DC, New York, NY, Austin, TX, San Francisco, CA and Los Angeles, CA.

SOURCE Business Location Switzerland

Read more:

BUSINESS LOCATION SWITZERLAND - A THRIVING HUB FOR ... - PR Newswire

S&P 500 equal-weight ETFs have returned to asset gathering territory as investors either profit-take on market cap-weighted gains or become increasingly wary of the indexs over-concentration in a handful of tech giants.

According to data from ETFLogic, the $2.9bn Xtrackers S&P 500 Equal Weight UCITS ETF (XDEW) has seen $127m inflows over the past week, as at 9 June.

This trend was even more pronounced in the US, with the $35bn Invesco S&P 500 Equal Weight ETF (RSP) adding a considerable $1.7bn in its strongest week of inflows since its inception.

It follows a flight to more risk-on allocations so far in 2023 amid headline-grabbing developments in artificial intelligence (AI) technology and expectations the Federal Reserve could start to cut interest rates by the end of the year.

While the latter may be supportive for debt-laden information technology and communications names, it could also signal the Fed deciding to halt its hawkish monetary policy programme as the US economy shows signs of weakness.

With equal-weight ETFs having relatively outsized positions in old economy sectors such as energy, materials and industrials, the possibility of recession and a return to optimism in tech has seen XDEW book $647m outflows this year, until last week.

However, onlookers are becoming increasingly sceptical of the surge enjoyed by the magnificent seven so far this year, with a combination of organic flows and index rebalances pushing unprecedented sums into tech names.

Source: Bank of America

Essentially all of the S&Ps year-to-date return comes from its top seven constituents Apple, Microsoft, Alphabet, Amazon, Meta, Nvidia and Tesla, Ben Bakkum, lead investing researcher at JP Morgan, said.

Those companies have together added over $3.6trn in market cap in 2023 while the other 493 companies in the index have together added almost $0.

Source: JP Morgan

At the time of writing, Apples $2.7trn market cap is equivalent to market cap of the bottom 200 companies in the S&P 500 and more than $100bn larger than the combined size of all Russell 2000 index constituents.

Despite becoming more cautious about headiness in tech valuations, investors have also lost enthusiasm for 2022 safe havens.

The $271m iShares S&P 500 Utilities Sector UCITS ETF (IUUS) shed more than half its assets following $336m outflows in the week to 9 June while the $1.1bn iShares S&P 500 UCITS ETF (IUES) also saw a $289m exodus.

UCITS ETF investors also still favour vanilla US equity, with $334m flowing into the $37.7bn Vanguard S&P 500 UCITS ETF (VUSA).

Meanwhile, weekly net short positions on the S&P 500 hit their highest level since 2007 at the start of June, according to the Commodity Futures Trading Commission (CFTC).

Source: CFTC, Bespoke Investment Group

View post:

S&P 500 equal-weight ETFs in vogue as investors avoid big tech - ETF Stream