Current Events in February 2018

The death of Florida Model S owner Joshua Brown in May 2016 is widely regarded as the first known fatality that occurred while a car’s autonomous technology was engaged.

But a new report suggests that a death linked to Tesla’s hyped Autopilot feature may have occurred six months earlier. The death happened in China, where Tesla has reportedly sold over $1 billion worth of vehicles.

Gao Yaning, 23, died on his way home from a wedding reception in January 2016 while driving his father’s Model S in the province of Hebei. Surveillance footage shows the car crashing into the back of a road-sweeping truck on the highway.

In the two years since, his father Jubin Yaning has been fighting Tesla in court in an attempt to prove that the company is misleading customers about the safety and sophistication of its Autopilot feature.  

Jubin is asking for 5 million in yuan, the equivalent of about $750,000, the site Jalopnik reports. Jubin told Jalopnik that if he wins the suit, he will fund a charity “to warn more Tesla owners not to use Autopilot.”

Failed to follow “operation rules”

When Gao’s father Jubin Yaning first filed his suit in 2016, Tesla claimed that the car was too damaged to determine whether Autopilot was in fact engaged.

But in a statement to Jalopnik reporter Ryan Felton, Tesla seemed to confirm the possibility, making claims about the safety of Autopilot without stating whether or not it was in use during the time of Gao’s crash.

Tesla said that Yaning failed “to drive safely in accordance with operation rules” but added that it has agreed to allow a third-party appraiser to review data from the vehicle.

“While the third-party appraisal is not yet complete, we have no reason to believe that Autopilot on this vehicle ever functioned other than as designed,” Tesla told Jalopnik.

Not considering the human element

Tesla has repeatedly claimed that its Autopilot feature improves vehicle safety, but it also says the owner’s manual warns that the feature is in beta-testing. Even when activated, drivers must pay attention and keep their hands on the wheel at all times.

After Joshua Brown died, Tesla told Wired magazine that , "the data is unequivocal that Autopilot reduces driver workload and results in a statistically significant improvement in safety." But at the dealership, consumers and regulators say that Tesla may be selling drivers on the idea that the Autopilot feature is more sophisticated than it actually is.

In investigating Brown’s death, the National Transportation Safety Board determined last year that while Brown bore responsibility for not paying enough attention, Tesla had not adequately considered the “human element” of so-called self-driving technology.

“This crash is an example of what can happen when automation is introduced ‘because we can’ without adequate consideration of the human element,” the board wrote.

“In aviation, airline pilots know that even when the autopilot is controlling their airplane, the pilots still play a crucial role. Joe and Suzy Public, on the other hand, may conclude from the name ‘autopilot’ that they need not pay any attention to the driving task because the autopilot is doing everything.”

The car’s forward collision warning  and automatic emergency braking systems also failed to activate shortly before the crash, the board’s investigation found.

Mounting complaints

A class action lawsuit filed against Tesla over its Autopilot technology last year claimed that the Model S and Model X cars made a number of dangerous maneuvers when Autopilot was activated, such as “lurching, slamming on the brakes for no reason, and failing to slow or stop when approaching other vehicles.”

The company responded to the lawsuit by telling Bloomberg News that “we have never claimed our vehicles already have functional ‘full self-driving capability,’....The inaccurate and sensationalistic view of our technology put forth by this group is exactly the kind of misinformation that threatens to harm consumer safety.”

Complaints about Tesla cars making dangerous driving maneuvers by themselves have also surfaced from drivers who were not even using the car’s Autopilot technology. ConsumerAffairs reported earlier this month on five cases in which drivers described their car suddenly taking off by itself as the driver was slowly parking.

A CarMax customer who argued that the nation’s largest used car dealership violated consumer protection laws in California when it sold her a defective Hyundai can proceed with her case,  a state appellate court ruled this week.

CarMax has dominated the used car industry thanks to its attractive stores, user-friendly website, anti-haggle policy, and the promise of a Certified Quality Inspection on all its inventory. But some consumer groups have charged that it’s all just cover-up for getting “lemons” off the lot at an inflated price.

The Sacramento advocacy group Consumers for Auto Reliability and Safety (CARS) last year found that nearly 25 percent of the inventory at eight CarMax locations was under recall and had not been repaired.

CarMax at the time claimed that “manufacturers do not allow CarMax to complete recall repairs” and that they were transparent with customers about cars under open recalls. But a three judge panel in the Fifth District Court of Appeal in Fresno disagreed, ruling 2-1 that a customer had a valid claim when she argued that CarMax is violating California’s Consumer Legal Remedies Act and the Unfair Competition Law.

The case was hailed by three consumer groups -- CARS, the Center for Auto Safety, and U.S. PIRG -- and filed by three attorneys on behalf of Tammy Gutierrez, a Bakersfield woman who purchased a 2008 Hyundai elantra in 2013.

CarMax open to potential liability

According to the consumer groups following the case, CarMax told Gutierrez that the Hyundai she eventually purchased had passed a rigorous 125-point inspection. But after buying the vehicle, she discovered that it was under recall due to brake lights that could intermittently stop working without warning, a defect that Hyundai warned “could increase the risk of a crash.”

Gutierrez tried to sue in 2016, without the help of an attorney, but a trial court sided with CarMax and dismissed her lawsuit.

Armed with legal help, Gutierrez appealed the decision, leading to last Thursday’s ruling. Legal experts say the case exposes CarMax to potential liability by allowing her lawsuit to go forward.

“They said she can go forward with the process. They didn’t say she will win,” a law professor explained to the Richmond Times-Dispatch.

CarMax told the paper in a statement that “CarMax has led the industry in recall transparency and shares vehicle specific recall information in-store and online. “

The auto-dealer added that “the California Court of Appeal’s opinion supports the disclosure of open recalls when a dealer is aware of them, which is CarMax’s current practice. The opinion is not a final decision in the case.”

After trying and failing twice last year to overturn the Affordable Care Act, also known as Obamacare, Republican leaders are turning once again to the courts.

GOP representatives from twenty states have joined together to sue the U.S. government, claiming the health care law is unconstitutional.

Republicans made this argument once before, stating that the individual mandate for consumers to buy health insurance is unconstitutional. But the U.S. Supreme Court upheld the law, finding that the fine consumers faced for not buying insurance was actually a tax.

Last year, the Trump Administration removed the fine for not buying health insurance, so Republicans argue that the removal of the threat of that "tax" now makes the law unconstitutional.

Removing the fine a key issue

According to Texas Attorney General Ken Paxton, the high court pinned its Obamacare ruling on the "tax." Now that the provision has been removed, Paxton says the law doesn't meet the constitutional standard.

“Obamacare’s irrational design wreaks havoc on health insurance markets,” said Wisconsin Attorney General Brad Schimel. “Obamacare causes premiums to rise and coverage to fall, forcing Wisconsin and other states to take extreme, costly measures to protect their citizens’ health and pocketbooks."

The National Federation of Independent Businesses (NFIB) brought the original court challenge to Obamacare in 2012. While the Constitution does not allow Congress to force individuals to purchase a product, the court narrowly interpreted the penalty for not purchasing health insurance as a tax, which Congress is authorized to levy.

Senate refused to repeal

The GOP-led House had no difficulty passing legislation last year that repealed Obamacare, but the measure faced obstacles in the Senate, where Republicans held only a two seat advantage. A handful of Republican lawmakers balked at repealing a law that resulted in more consumers being covered by health insurance.

The final attempt failed in late July when Sen. John McCain (R-Ariz.), who was battling cancer, dramatically returned to the capital to cast a deciding vote to allow a vote on the Senate's latest effort -- a straight repeal of the Affordable Care Act.

But on Twitter, McCain made clear he was only voting to allow debate on the GOP bill. He wasn't going to support the measure itself.

Health officials say this year’s worse-than-average flu season is finally showing signs of loosening its grip across the U.S. 

Over the last two weeks, there has been a decline in the number of people going to the doctor with flu-like symptoms, according to the U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC). As of Feb. 17, the agency said that 6.4 percent of visits to doctors were for the flu -- down from 7.5 percent the week before.

However, the CDC says consumers should still take steps to protect themselves against the flu and get the flu shot. 

Not over yet

Experts expect the flu season to continue through March. 

The CDC’s national map of influenza activity showed that flu-linked hospitalization rates rose from 67.9 per 100,000 people for the week ending Feb. 10 to 74.5 per 100,000 people for the week ending Feb. 17. The number of children who have died from the flu is now at 97.

Many of this year’s flu cases can be attributed to the ineffectiveness of the vaccine currently being used; the CDC points out that it is only 25 percent effective against the H3N2 virus, this year’s most widespread form of the flu.

Against all types of influenza, its effectiveness is 36 percent; among children aged 6 months through 8 years, its effectiveness is 59 percent.

Consumers urged to vaccinate

But even though the vaccine isn’t as effective against the most common flu strain, the CDC still recommends that those who haven’t been vaccinated do so. That’s because the vaccine is more effective against other types of the flu that are also currently circulating.

Those who get the vaccine and still get the flu are less likely to experience flu complications (such as pneumonia) since the virus tends to be milder in people who were vaccinated. 

To protect against the flu, the CDC says everyone should: 

• Get a flu shot (for those aged 6 months and older)
• Avoid infected people if possible
• Wash hands frequently
• Cover mouth and nose with a tissue when you cough or sneeze

The Federal Communications Commission (FCC) has proposed new rules aimed at curbing unwanted robocalls, but a coalition of consumer groups argues the rules don't go far enough.

The FCC proposal would allow voice service providers to block some "spoofed" robocalls -- calls that appear to originate from a local number when they could be made from overseas.

But in comments filed with the agency by the National Consumer Law Center, Consumers Union, the Consumer Federation of America, Consumer Action, National Association of Consumer Advocates, and Public Citizen argue the proposed rule is already behind the curve.

“The FCC rules do something: they allow telephone companies to block spoofed calls from numbers that do not actually exist. But spoofers have simply moved to make fraudulent calls from real numbers—meaning that the rules do not cut down on the spoofed calls at all,” said National Consumer Law Center Senior Counsel Margot Saunders.

Saunders likens it to closing one door of a double door to keep the mice out, but if the second door is open, the mice will simply use it.

"Moreover, the rules are not even mandatory so telephone companies are free to ignore them,” she said.

Recommendations

The groups call for some type of meaningful authentication for all calls, along with a robust robocall-blocking tool. That, they say, would take care of most of the problem.

Scammers have made extensive use of robocalls in recent years, since the technology allows one operator to make a large number of calls at once. When a recipient answers, a recorded voice is designed to keep them on the line. Since a large percentage of scam calls end in hang ups, it allows a fraudster to focus on the few potential victims who are still listening when the message ends.

The consumer groups say the FCC rule should require telephone companies to provide free, effective caller ID authentication for every call, along with free call-blocking services. Some mobile providers already have that capability.

“Bad actors are continuing to find ways around the rules to prevent fraudulent robocalls and take advantage of consumers, but there is more that can be done to protect consumers,” said Maureen Mahoney, policy analyst at Consumers Union.

“The FCC should ensure that consumers can control the calls they receive by requiring that phone companies provide blocking technology free of charge to consumers.”

Staggering number of robocalls

In 2016, the YouMail National Robocall Index (YNRI) estimated that somewhere around 2.3 billion robocalls were made in the U.S. in the month of January alone, a staggering 51,523 calls per minute.

The Federal Trade Commission (FTC) says some types of robocalls are permitted under the law. For example, your doctor's office may use a robocall to remind you of an appointment. Political messages may be delivered with a robocall, as can messages from debt collectors.

However, using a robocall to sell any type of product or service is illegal. When you get one of these calls, you should hang up immediately, the FTC advises.

A series of studies over the last decade have concluded that too much sitting is as bad as smoking cigarettes, urging office workers to get up on their feet.

Now an Australian study suggests we should all take a seat.

Writing in the medical journal Ergonomics, researchers at Curtin University say they found that office workers who spend prolonged periods standing tend to suffer from leg pain and a slower mental ability.

"Standing is being used to replace sitting by office workers; however, there are health risks associated with prolonged standing," the authors write. "In a laboratory study involving two hour prolonged standing, discomfort increased (all body areas), reaction time and mental state deteriorated while creative problem-solving improved. Prolonged standing should be undertaken with caution."

Growing use of standing desks

The researchers say their findings are relevant because of the growing use of adjustable desks in the workplace, which allow sedentary office workers to get out of their chairs and stand while they work. A number of different companies now market these desks as a way to improve health and productivity.

Previous studies, like one from Kaiser Permanente in 2014, suggested that prolonged sitting significantly increases heart attack risks in men. The Australian research runs counter to a 2016 study at Texas A&M that suggested working while standing actually improved mental performance.

“Test results indicated that continued use of standing desks was associated with significant improvements in executive function and working memory capabilities,” assistant professor Ranjana Mehta said at the time. “Changes in corresponding brain activation patterns were also observed.”

'Little evidence'

Despite these studies, the Australian researchers contend there is little evidence to support the use of standing desks.

In an admittedly small study, the researchers say they found people who used the standing desks for prolonged periods of time began having pain in their lower back and legs. They say the pain is likely due to swollen veins, posing potential danger to the heart.

Despite the findings, health experts still appear to view too much sitting as more harmful than excessive standing. Dr. James A. Levine of the Mayo Clinic writes that too much sitting is known to be associated with obesity and metabolic syndrome, conditions that can lead to other serious health problems.

Levine suggests office workers stand when they get the chance. Better still, he says taking short walks to interrupt sedentary activity will burn calories and break down fats and sugars within the body.

Citigroup is about to put a bundle back in its credit card customers’ wallets thanks to a miscalculation on the annual percentage rate (APR).

With hat in hand, the company owned up to the mistake quickly both to the credit card accounts involved as well as federal regulators.

“While we have found no evidence of employee misconduct, we should have identified these issues sooner,” said company spokeswoman Elizabeth Fogarty in a statement. “We sincerely apologize to our customers and are taking every action to provide refunds as quickly as possible.”

Around 1.75 million of Citi’s U.S. credit card accounts dating from 2011-2017 are impacted – about 1 percent of Citi card holders during that time frame. On average, those affected by the error will receive $190.

What exactly happened

The Credit Card Accountability Responsibility and Disclosure Act mandates that any card issuer whose rates increase over time must examine those accounts every six months.

In Citi’s case, it was the more creditworthy customers who took the hit. In the company’s interest rate review, the method it used to calculate APRs didn’t accurately reflect the total benefit customers should have received for good behavior, such as making timely payments and having higher amounts of available credit.

The current APR range on Citi’s credit cards runs between 14.24 and 25.24 percent based on a customer’s “creditworthiness.”

If you’re affected, what’s next?

In last Friday’s securities filing acknowledging the issue and cost, Citi insisted it’s in the process of reviewing accounts and plans on having refund checks sent to its customers by the second half of 2018.

This isn’t the first mistake that Citi has made in recent memory. In late 2017, the bank’s Australian arm refunded more than $3.3 million AU ($2.59 million US) to some 40,000 customers. The company’s gaffe down under was that it neglected to refund customers whose credit card accounts were closed with an existing balance.

The Food and Drug Administration (FDA) has released the results of a two-year study into the health effects associated with bisphenol A (BPA), finding little to change its position that the chemical poses no harm to humans.

BPA was once widely used in plastic containers such as water bottles to make them rigid. Many manufacturers have stopped using it in the last decade.

However, BPA is still widely used in the liners of canned food and often coats paper grocery receipts. Environmentalists have pointed to studies showing the chemical can negatively affect human reproduction.

In 2010, Kaiser Permanente released a five-year study concluding that significant exposure to BPA was associated with decreased sperm concentration, decreased total sperm count, decreased sperm vitality, and decreased sperm motility.

Not changing its position

All along, however, the FDA has held the view that human exposure to BPA is not enough to cause harm. Dr. Stephen Ostroff, the FDA's deputy commissioner for foods and veterinary medicine, says the results of the agency's latest study does not change that position.

"We base our regulatory decisions on robust science so consumers can feel confident about the foods they eat," Ostroff said in a statement. "The FDA looks at all available scientific evidence when reviewing the safety of foods and food packaging, and regularly collaborates with other federal partners to protect and promote public health."

The FDA says experts from federal agencies and academic grantees worked together to gather research to address known data gaps about BPA's effects on the human body. The findings have been released for public comment.

Increase in tumors

"Overall, the study found 'minimal effects' for the BPA-dosed groups of rodents," Ostroff said. "The report did identify some areas that may merit further research, such as the increase in occurrence of mammary gland tumors at one of the five doses, in one of the five groups. But the significance of these findings will be assessed through the peer review process."

The FDA report may do little to quell the debate over the use of the chemical. The government finding that current uses of BPA do not pose a human threat is at odds with a number of small studies in the last decade that conclude it can change animals’ reproductive organs and contribute to other health issues.

While government health agencies have consistently found that BPA is safe, some major corporations have taken unilateral action. In 2009, six manufacturers stopped using BPA in infant formula bottles and cups. In 2012, Campbell's began phasing it out of the lining of soup cans.

A study produced by PinneyAssociates, a firm closely associated with the nicotine replacement industry, says U.S. consumers wrongly believe there is a link between nicotine and cancer.

It conducted a survey of adults that showed more than half believed that nicotine is the substance causing most of the cancer linked to smoking. Another 21 percent said they weren't sure whether nicotine was a carcinogen.

"That adults' misperceptions about the health effects of nicotine persist despite the long-term availability of FDA-approved over-the-counter nicotine replacement products is troubling and needs to be addressed with clear communications to the public—especially smokers—that nicotine is not what is causing smoking-related disease," said Karen Gerlach, the lead author on the study.

Questions about nicotine persist

But nicotine does not get a clean bill of health from many health experts. A study by the Indian Journal of Medical and Paediatric Oncology study, published on a National Institutes of Health (NIH) website, says nicotine has its own health issues.

"There is an increased risk of cardiovascular, respiratory, gastrointestinal disorders," the authors write. "There is decreased immune response and it also poses ill impacts on the reproductive health. It affects the cell proliferation, oxidative stress, apoptosis, DNA mutation by various mechanisms which leads to cancer."

The study concludes that the use of nicotine needs regulation and its sale should be "under supervision of trained medical personnel."

The other side of the debate

But there are plenty of scientists who take the other side of the debate, arguing that smoking cigarettes is many times worse than using nicotine products. Some doctors say a person who gives up smoking a pack of cigarettes a day for nicotine gum has removed most of their previous health risk.

In a recent Reuters interview, Ann McNeill, a professor at King's College London, called for "de-demonizing" nicotine. She says the risks are complicated and relative, with cigarette smoking at one end and nicotine use on the other.

British and American health officials also differ on the benefits and/or risks associated with e-cigarettes. U.S. health researchers tend to highlight the risks.

Late last week, researchers from Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health released a study of e-cigarettes and found small amounts of some toxic metals in the liquids before use, but much higher levels after the liquids had been exposed to the device’s heating coils.

But a 2014 British study looked favorably upon e-cigarettes, concluding that smokers who used them were more likely to improve their health because they had a much better chance of kicking the habit.

A local news channel in Australia reported that a bizarre hack prevented people from accessing its own Facebook page. When viewers tried to visit the Channel 7 Facebook page, they were automatically redirected to the profile page belonging to Arie Hasit, Mark Zuckerberg's former college roommate.

Hasit was an early adopter of the social media platform, but does not work for the company. He currently lives in Jerusalem and became a rabbi last year.

Individual Facebook users also reported being redirected to his page when trying to access their own profiles. A Facebook spokesman confirmed the instances but denied it was a breach.

The spokesman told The West Australian newspaper “this was due to a misconfiguration, not a hack or a security issue. We promptly fixed the matter, and the affected Pages are working normally.”

Tesla

Tesla is the latest entity to fall victim to crypto-jacking, a hack in which a victim unknowingly mines cryptocurrency on behalf of a hacker. Such breaches have become more common with the rising value of cryptocurrencies. A similar breach last week affected consumers who visited government websites in the United States, the U.K., and Canada.

Crypto-jacking allows hackers to put someone else on the hook for the expensive process of “mining” for cryptocurrencies like Bitcoin, a process that is so energy-intensive that experts warn it could worse global warming.

It costs between $3,000 to $7,000 to produce a single Bitcoin in energy and hardware expenses, according to research conducted by Morgan Stanley.

Tesla confirmed that its Amazon cloud network had been breached by crypto-jackers following an investigation and discovery initially made by the security from RedLock. Tesla added that customer data had not been compromised.

"Our initial investigation found no indication that customer privacy or vehicle safety or security was compromised in any way,"  a company spokeswoman told the BBC.

Fortune 500 companies

Last fall, the security firm IBM Security noted a “significant increase” in reports of fraudulent wire transfers from its corporate clientele.

Hackers had apparently convinced accounting personnel at “some Fortune 500 companies” to transfer money into their accounts, “resulting in the theft of millions of dollars.”

The firm investigated and, in a report published on Wednesday, detailed the sophisticated measures hackers took to defraud corporations. They used stolen email credentials so that they appeared to work for the company, infiltrated existing conversations taking place online between company employees, and imitated vendors that companies did business with.

“In cases in which additional approval or paperwork was needed, the attackers found and filled out appropriate forms and spoofed supervisor emails to get required approvals,” IBM Security writes.

The report highlights the ability of hackers to defraud corporations without having to use malware, which law enforcement agencies and companies have been cracking down on.

Tinder

Researchers at the security firm AppSecure found a vulnerability in which hackers would be able to manage a stranger’s Tinder account by simply knowing their phone number. The news prompted Tinder to change its login system.

Airbnb has announced that it will expand its selection of travel accommodation options available to customers to include hotels, new housing categories, and a loyalty program.

The new plans for the 10-year-old company were announced Thursday by co-founder and CEO Brian Chesky at an official Airbnb event.

The plans include the incorporation of a tiered program, which starts with Airbnb Plus -- a category for higher-end homes that are vetted by the company to ensure they meet certain requirements.

“Every Airbnb Plus home is one-of-a-kind, thoughtfully designed, and equipped with a standard set of amenities -- whether you’re in a private room or have the entire place to yourself,” reads the website for Airbnb Plus.

All Airbnb Plus homes are visited by a human inspector “to ensure comfort, consistency, and design,” the site says. “They are checked for 100-plus things that guests told us they love, from must-have amenities to the art on the walls.”

Chesky also unveiled a new brand called Beyond by Airbnb -- a separate platform comprised exclusively of mansions and penthouses that will open this spring. This luxury tier of properties will include “custom-designed trips of a lifetime” at the “world’s finest homes, custom experiences, and world-class hospitality.”

Recognizing hotels

In a marked shift from its former stance as a rival of hotels, Airbnb announced that it’s officially recognizing hotels on its platform.

Hotels and bed and breakfasts were previously allowed to be listed on the site, but now the company will be giving these properties official classification. Airbnb hopes this will make it easier for customers to find those listings through online travel agencies like Expedia and Priceline.

Additionally, the company will roll out a rewards plan called “Superguest” that will offer benefits to frequent customers. Superguests will get benefits such as flight upgrades, discounts, and benefits. Airbnb will launch the new rewards program this summer following a pilot with 10,000 guests.

Recent surveys show U.S. consumers don't have that much confidence in self-driving cars.

Nearly 60 percent of drivers who currently own a connected car -- defined as a vehicle with certain “smart” technology features -- said they wouldn’t buy a self-driving car even if money wasn’t an issue, according to a survey conducted by Solace.

But money almost certainly will be an issue. Automotive experts who tend to be autonomous vehicle advocates are reluctant to talk about what one of these self-driving cars will cost.

A 2014 article in Fast Company put a price tag on an autonomous Toyota Prius, used to demonstrate how a self-driving car can give new mobility to a vision-impaired consumer. After adding up the cost of all that technology, the publication determined that the Prius cost more than a Ferrari 599, with a price tag of $320,000.

That's why many automotive experts believe that self-driving cars will not be individually owned, but part of the “shared” economy. Nissan has apparently adopted that point of view.

Nissan getting into ride-sharing

Nissan plans to not only make autonomous cars, but operate them in a ride-sharing business model. According to Reuters, the Japanese automaker is “preparing for a future in which self-driving cars are anticipated to curb vehicle ownership.”

The report says Nissan is developing and testing a service it calls Easy Ride, which uses ride-hailing software to control its fleet of self-driving cars by putting it in the same business as Uber and Lyft.

Nissan is the first automaker to take this step, but it is unlikely to be the last. Ford and GM are both heavily involved in autonomous vehicle research and testing, and it's not a stretch to assume they might also consider a business model in which they operate some of the cars they produce.

So where does that leave consumers who are open and trusting of the emerging autonomous vehicle technology? As with any technology, the price is likely to come down over time.

Still, there is a lot of room between $320,000 and $30,000 – the average amount consumers now spend on a new vehicle. In the future, consumers may ride in a self-driving car, but it may not be parked in their garage.

The plans for Amazon Go, Amazon’s revolutionary convenience store, just ramped up further with up to six more storefronts expected in 2018, according to a Recode report.

The company will keep its brick-and-mortar experiment close to home, adding more in Seattle where the first location opened, last month, with the next stop likely being Los Angeles.

Amazon Go is another peg in the company’s effort to flip the way people shop. With its sights set on a piece of the $550 billion U.S. convenience store niche, the move builds on Amazon’s jump into the grocery world’s fray with its purchase of Whole Foods, as well as the rollout of 13 physical bookstores.

True get-it-and-go

In what may sound like The Jetsons-meet-shoplifting, Amazon’s Just Walk Out Technology allows shoppers to scan their phone when they enter the store, grab what they want, and walk out without having to stop at a cash register to pay.

Artificial intelligence charges the customer’s credit card every time an item is picked up. If you change your mind and put it back on the shelf, the software removes it from your account.

Amazon doesn’t see this ingenuity of Amazon Go as another competitor to full-service stores like Wal-Mart but rather an automated convenience store stocked with snacks, ready-prep meals, day-to-day basics, and beer & wine.

Still, it won’t be putting its toe in this water alone. Kroger announced that it has plans for its initiative called Scan, Bag, Go at 400+ locations by the end of 2018.

While Kroger’s move seems like Amazon is entering a dogfight, the plans for Amazon Go are a little more deliberate with the goal of finding out if a cashier-less experience is even viable. The company’s announcement to expand implies initial trials are going as planned, but those have all been in Amazon’s backyard in Seattle. Greenlighting metros outside its comfort zone appears to be a move toward finding out how the rest of the world will react.

Are jobs at risk?

As of 2016, there were more than 3.5 million cashiers in the United States making an average of $20,180 per year. The Bureau of Labor Statistics had already projected that about 30,000 of those would go away by 2026, but digital shopping forays like Amazon’s and Kroger’s may grow those numbers higher if the technology behind Amazon Go catches on.

However, Amazon’s thrown a towel over that crystal ball, saying Go’s technology won’t eliminate jobs, but rather change jobs its employees do. “We’ve just put associates on different kinds of tasks where we think it adds to the customer experience,” Gianna Puerini, the executive in charge of Amazon Go, told the New York Times.

Those job tasks will likely shift toward restocking Go’s shelves and assisting customers with any technical issues or pointing them in the right direction. Although the store’s concept is “cashierless,” someone will be needed to check I.D.s before taking beer or wine home.

Where would you go if you lost your job, split with your significant other, or had some setback that caused you to contemplate starting over? It’s a difficult question, and many consumers might not know where to start.

Fortunately, LendingTree has done the research for you. The online lender has published a study that ranks the best cities for those seeking a fresh start.

The study looked at eight variables in the 50 largest U.S, metro areas, ranking them as the most conducive for starting a new career and improving health, love life, and finances.

It considered local median income, rent prices, and state laws protecting consumers from aggressive debt collection. To make the list, cities had to provide opportunities for employment and career advancement.

The top 10

The top 10 metro areas identified by the study are:

1. Buffalo, N.Y.

2. Minneapolis, Minn.

3. Salt Lake City, Utah

4. Austin, Tex.

5. Hartford, Conn.

6. San Diego, Calif.

7. Milwaukee, Wis.

8. Baltimore, Md.

9. Richmond, Va.

10. Boston, Mass.

Other metro areas making the list include Raleigh, N.C., San Antonio, Tex., Columbus, Ohio, Phoenix, Ariz., and Indianapolis, Ind.

LendingTree says Buffalo tops its list because it has the lowest median rent – $738 – of any city it studied. It also found 94 percent of its adults over 35 are covered by health insurance.

Minneapolis placed highly on the list due to its extremely low unemployment rate. Minneapolis residents over 35 earn a median salary of $70,915.

Salt Lake City came in at number three because it has a high percentage of residents over 35 enrolled in school and single. It also shows up well when it comes to low rents and high incomes.

To gauge how residents of these different cities are doing financially, LendingTree looked at average credit scores. It gave extra points to communities where it found credit scores rose at the fastest rate, suggesting residents were improving their financial standing.

Gasoline prices, which normally rise at this time of year, have gone down in the last week, matching levels that were prevalent a month ago.

According to the AAA Fuel Gauge Survey, the national average price of regular is around $2.52 a gallon, down three cents in the last week and about a penny less than a month ago. The average price of premium gas is $3.06 a gallon, and the average price of diesel fuel is $2.96.

Motorists in most areas of the country had been experiencing rising prices because the price of oil had risen, along with the stock market. But when stock prices fell sharply earlier this month, so did the price of oil.

Enjoy it while it lasts

Patrick DeHaan, head of petroleum analysis at GasBuddy, says consumers should enjoy falling gas prices while they last.

“We've seen a bit of a respite after oil prices dropped to $58 a barrel, but prices have rebounded, so that break at the pump is going to be short lived,” DeHaan told ConsumerAffairs. “It's just a matter of time before prices head back up again.”

And it's not just the price of oil that's going to send gasoline prices back up again. DeHaan says refineries are beginning their period of annual maintenance and switching over to more expensive summer grade blends. That has the effect of reducing the available supply of gasoline.

“According to the latest report from the Energy Information Administration (EIA), refinery utilization has dropped two weeks in a row,” DeHaan said. “We're still looking for a rise of 25 cents a gallon in the average gasoline price between now and Memorial Day.”

According to AAA, the recent price decline has been fairly uniform across the country, with drivers in the Midwest and South seeing the largest prices declines. Hawaii, which always has the highest prices, and Indiana were the only states to see prices rise in the last week.

Hard to predict how long it will last

“The question isn’t how low will they go, but how long will we see prices decline,” said AAA's Jeanette Casselano. “A handful of major refineries are undergoing maintenance. If production slows at a high rate and if crude oil prices jump, these events could push pump prices back up in late February or March.”

The recent drop in oil prices coincided with an increase in production by U.S. shale oil producers that quickly added to the supply. But DeHaan says consumers can't depend on U.S. producers to keep a lid on prices.

A recent change in U.S. law now allows U.S. producers to export oil, and DeHaan says the U.S. hit a record earlier this month, exporting two million barrels a day.

The Trump administration on Tuesday proposed a new rule that would allow people to remain on inexpensive, short-term health insurance plans that come with fewer consumer protections.

“Short-term, limited-duration insurance is a type of health insurance coverage that is designed to fill temporary gaps in coverage when an individual is transitioning from one plan or coverage to another form of coverage,” the Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) says.

Short-term health plans are already available in the United States, but under Obamacare rules, the plans cannot last longer than 90 days. The HHS proposal would allow the plans to last up to 12 months.

Under such plans, health insurers can exclude people with pre-existing conditions and charge more for certain health conditions. They would likely be more attractive to customers with fewer healthcare needs.

"Americans need more choices in health insurance so they can find coverage that meets their needs," HHS Secretary Alex Azar said in an announcement explaining the proposal. "The status quo is failing too many Americans who face skyrocketing costs and fewer and fewer choices.”

Less coverage and fraud risks

The move to expand access to short-term health insurance follows a similar proposal issued by the HHS last month to allow consumers to form their own “associations” across state lines to purchase health insurance. Both ideas were raised in response to a directive that Trump signed in October, which asked the HHS  to explore coverage options are “exempt from the onerous and expensive insurance mandates” stipulated by Obamacare.

Expansion of access to so-called “skinny” health insurance plans may seem attractive to the millions of Americans who remain uninsured, but experts warn that the cheaper health plans will offer less coverage, be vulnerable to fraud, and could take healthy, profitable customers out of the Affordable Care Act risk pool. Officials from the previous administration see the proposal as Trump’s latest attempt to undermine Obamacare.

The proposals have been publicly championed, on the other hand, by chain retailers and chain restaurants, some of the nation’s largest employers of uninsured workers. Both industries have bitterly fought the Affordable Care Act and its mandate that employers provide their full-time workers with health insurance.

From so-called Obamacare surcharges on customers’ bills to cutting workers’ hours and benefits, retailers and restaurants have protested the Affordable Care Act in a number of ways.

Wal-Mart, for instance, in 2014 terminated health benefits they offered to part-time workers just as the Affordable Care Act was rolling out. “Like every company, Wal-Mart continues to face rising health care costs,” Wal-Mart said of its decision at the time.

“Skinny” plans not the answer, providers say

The National Retail Federation, which represents Wal-Mart and other retailers, has championed Trump’s attempts to repeal the Affordable Care Act and his October directive calling for insurance plans exempt from “‘onerous” mandates.

“As an industry with extremely tight profit margins, retailers are unable to absorb the added costs, and could be forced to lay off workers,” the trade group claims.

Providers who want to expand access to affordable care are doubtful that “skinny” insurance plans are the answer.

"You can always make insurance more affordable by making insurance worse,” Dr. Adam Gaffney, a pulmonologist who advocates for single-payer healthcare, told ConsumerAffairs last month.