Taking too long? Close loading screen.
Connect with us


The Chinese challenge to Bitcoin is ready. The Central Bank distributes 1.5 million dollars in e-yuan



Starting on October 9, around 50,000 Chinese citizens will be able to go shopping with digital yuan.

Grow Your Business, Not Your Inbox

Stay informed and join our daily newsletter now!

October 12, 2020 2 min read

This article was translated from our Spanish edition using AI technologies. Errors may exist due to this process.

  • The People’s Bank of China has been developing a sovereign digital currency since last year.

The People’s Bank of China launched the $ 1.5 million free distribution pilot program as part of the digital yuan trials, Sina Finance reported.

The Shenzhen Municipal Cyberspace Administration organized a lottery among 50,000 randomly selected people to distribute 10 million e-yuan ($ 1.5 million). Winners will have access to a 200 yuan ($ 30) bag of digital currency, which can be spent between October 12 and 18 at one of the 3,389 authorized outlets.

The cryptocurrency cannot be transferred to someone else’s account, nor can it be converted into cash. Unspent funds will be withdrawn from the bags after October 18.

The People’s Bank of China has been developing a sovereign digital currency since last year. But it is not the only one: The seven major central banks in the world – including the Federal Reserve – and the Bank for International Settlements are considering the possibility of issuing their own digital currency that coexists with cash.


Continue Reading
Click to comment

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *


Do Quibi’s Problems Come Down to a Confusing Name?



Terrible timing has certainly contributed to a difficult start for Jeffrey Katzenberg’s mobile-video platform, but maybe it isn’t just that.

Grow Your Business, Not Your Inbox

Stay informed and join our daily newsletter now!

May 15, 2020 4 min read

Opinions expressed by Entrepreneur contributors are their own.

I will come right out and say that I think Quibi is a confusing name. But that isn’t necessarily a bad thing. Let me explain. Good names are usually only good in the rearview mirror. At the time they are created, they seem risky and sometimes dumb. Are Google and inherently good names, or do they have the benefit of a rosy rear view? Probably the latter. 

Terrible timing has certainly contributed to a difficult start for the Jeffrey Katzenberg-founded mobile-video platform, which launched earlier this spring. Still, maybe it isn’t just the timing. Maybe they made bad decisions. Maybe the product doesn’t fit. A name should be judged based on how well it matches the company’s criteria, not on public . Because, as mentioned, success shades how we perceive the company, not the strength of the name. Phil Rosenzweig calls this tendency to be biased by success The Halo Effect.

Related: Brad Flowers’s The Naming Book is available now from Amazon | Barnes & Noble | IndieBound.

A company that raises nearly $2 billion should plan for success. They certainly planned a naming strategy with that in mind. The criteria assumed rapid adoption in the U.S. and quick adoption abroad. Quibi is purpose-built for travel. It feels familiar in the UK with its close tie to the slangy quid. You can imagine the French embracing it as “Kee-bee,” similar to . It is at home in Arabic and Hindi. The alternating consonant/vowel, consonant/vowel construction is reminiscent of one of the most well-traveled brands, Coca-Cola. 

However, those positives aren’t positive in the current light. If the naming strategy assumes rapid usage in the U.S. and that doesn’t happen, the international flair puts up barriers to a skeptical stateside audience with more time on their hands than usual. The primary obstacle is unclear pronunciation.

We have all been in a bar and become interested in an exotic beer, only to order the IPA because we didn’t know how to pronounce the other one. Same with a dish in a restaurant or an author in a bookstore. People, in general, don’t like to look stupid, and few things make you feel as stupid as saying something incorrectly. 

There are a couple of ambiguous points in Quibi. I mispronounced it before I heard someone say it. Rhyme is one of the factors that improve memorability in a word; maybe I was trying to force it into the name. Also, the decision to end the name in “-i” rather than “-y” makes the word look more French. I found myself saying “Kee-bee” as I was reading to myself. It feels more snappy, more energetic and in-line with quick snippets of content.

The second hangup is with the tagline. Currently, it reads: “Quick bites. Big stories.” That leads you to think the name is a blend of the words quick and bite. But, as the reader, you quickly reconsider this because pronouncing it “Kwi-bye” doesn’t seem right. It doesn’t feel or look right, and you are left a little confused. If you combine quick and big, you get closer to the right pronunciation, but quick and big aren’t as meaningful as quick and bite.

I will admit to Googling the name to figure out its pronunciation. There were several videos, which probably isn’t a good sign. The name is intended to be pronounced like “Quimby” without the -m, which is the last point of confusion. With this pronunciation, you would expect the more standard English spelling of Quiby. 

Related: Elon Musk’s Boring Company Completes Excavation of Las Vegas Tunnels

All is not lost, though. Defying expectations can be a good thing. The result is memorability. The more you have to think about the name, the more likely you will be to recall it. If Quibi can overcome launching in a pandemic by providing users with great content, and assuming it can move quickly abroad, then I think we will all be looking back in 10 years thinking: “Damn, Quibi is a really great name.” If not, I am afraid it will end up with the Nova in the dustbin of misunderstood and misremembered names that we don’t like because the product didn’t live up to our expectations.  



Continue Reading


4 Reasons Emotionally Intelligent Leaders Impact the Bottom Line



October 22, 2020 6 min read

Opinions expressed by Entrepreneur contributors are their own.

If you’re a leader, chances are good you’ve been reading and hearing about emotional intelligence more often than normal lately. Emotional intelligence goes beyond empathy and listening to others. These qualities, while important, are not by themselves going to make you an effective leader. You need , courage, the ability to tell people what they don’t want to hear (but need to hear) in the right way, assertiveness and influence. If we have high EQ, not only do we tend to have more self-awareness and mastery of our own emotions, but we also have more social awareness and can adapt our communication style and language to suit our audience and build relationships.

Why should we care about emotional intelligence in a work environment? What impact does it really have on the bottom line?

According to a study by Development Dimensions International, which did a global leadership forecast study in 2011, with responses from 1,897 human resources professionals and 12,423 leaders from 74 countries, in the area of key metrics like financial performance, organizations with the highest quality leaders were 13 times more likely to outperform their industry competitors.

So, how does emotional intelligence contribute to high quality leadership?

The most effective leaders are all alike in one crucial way: They all have a high degree of what has come to be known as emotional intelligence. It’s not that IQ and technical skills are irrelevant. They do matter, but…they are the entry-level requirements for executive positions. –Daniel Goleman

1. Emotional intelligence is linked to high performance

, an emotional intelligence expert, studied the emotional intelligence of personalities within the workplace, and discovered that emotional intelligence was the strongest predictor of high performance in all types of jobs. In a survey carried out by TalentSmart, of which Dr. Bradberry is co-founder, they found that:

  • 90 percent of the top performers were high in emotional intelligence, with a higher average income per year and an increase by one point of emotional intelligence contributing to as much as an extra $1,300 in annual salary.
  • 20 percent of low performers were high in emotional intelligence.
  • Emotional intelligence also accounted for up to 60 percent of the job performance for supervisors through CEOs.

High-performing leaders equates to better quality leadership and better results for the .

Related Article: Why You Need Emotional Intelligence to Succeed in Business

2. There are relatively few leaders high in EQ in senior leadership positions

The interesting point is that despite emotional intelligence being linked to high performance, senior leadership does not often reflect this. Bradberry discovered a trend through measuring the emotional intelligence of 100,000 senior executives across industries in six continents.

The emotional intelligence of an executive rises as they climb managerial positions, peaking at manager level and dropping off significantly to the CEO position.

This means that most executives that are promoted have the least emotional intelligence, even though it’s a strong predictor of performance and great leadership.

These statistics present a golden opportunity for companies that are looking to be future intelligent and competitive by recognizing, developing and supporting leaders to become more emotionally intelligent, and then helping them to rise to the top of the company.

Related Article: 5 Reasons Why Emotional Intelligence Is the Future of Work

3. Emotionally intelligent leaders lead higher performing teams

According to research by the Goleman EI, 80 percent of employees with poor manager relationships are disengaged, and 50 percent of former employees left to get away from their manager.

High employee turnover can be a huge cost to a business, and if the problem with the managers concerned is allowed to continue, then it might be difficult to recruit and retain going forward as well.

On the other hand, engaged employees who are inspired and motivated by a high-quality leader will perform at a higher level. Where employees feel that they are being treated with respect and feel listened to and understood, it creates loyalty and the sense of being one team.

One of the keys to being constantly innovative as a company is to encourage and champion appropriate ideas from your team. That will not happen unless a leader creates “psychological safety,” an idea first introduced by Amy Edmondson, a Harvard professor, who says that this is necessary for employees to grow, improve and learn from their mistakes. If employees feel safe and think that their leaders are on their side, they will be more creative and productive.

4. Emotionally intelligent leaders know their customer

Brand loyalty is hard to come by. There are many contenders vying for the attention of customers, and unless there is a compelling reason to stay, customers don’t care about who they use as much as we might think they do. We wouldn’t have to spend so much time worrying about what the competition was doing if we were secure in the value and customer care that we were providing to our customers.

How about rather than seeing our customers as numbers, invoices and turnover, we started to understand what our customers really want, need and value? In other words, we start to see them on a very human level. If we are emotionally intelligent as leaders, we will have taken the time to listen and ask questions either directly to our customers or through listening to our frontline employees.

With the pace of technology accelerating rapidly, it’s time for us to focus on the aspects of us that make us human. Our creativity, empathy, innovation and awareness. In the workplace of the future, our ability to capitalize upon this, and develop it in others, might ultimately lead to our company’s success or failure.

The tangible bottom line benefits of emotional intelligence are there. It takes some effort to develop and hone EQ. By doing so, you will continue to reap the benefits tomorrow and in the years to come.

Related Article: At Work, Emotional Intelligence Pays


Continue Reading


Wikipedia and W.H.O. Join to Combat Covid Misinformation



As part of efforts to stop the spread of false information about the coronavirus pandemic, Wikipedia and the World Health Organization announced a collaboration on Thursday: The health agency will grant the online encyclopedia free use of its published information, graphics and videos.

The collaboration is the first between Wikipedia and a health agency.

“We all consult just a few apps in our daily life, and this puts W.H.O. content right there in your language, in your town, in a way that relates to your geography,” said Andrew Pattison, a digital content manager for the health agency who helped negotiate the contract. “Getting good content out quickly disarms the misinformation.”

Since its start in 2001, Wikipedia has become one of the world’s 10 most consulted sites; it is frequently viewed for health information.

The agreement puts much of the W.H.O.’s material into the Wikimedia “commons,” meaning it can be reproduced or retranslated anywhere, without the need to seek permission — as long as the material is identified as coming from the W.H.O. and a link to the original is included.

“Equitable access to trusted health information is critical to keeping people safe and informed,” said Tedros Adhanom Ghebreyesus, the W.H.O.’s director general.

His agency translates its work into six official languages, which do not include, for example, Hindi, Bengali, German or Portuguese, so billions of people cannot read its documents in their native or even second language.

Wikipedia articles, by contrast, are translated into about 175 languages.

The first W.H.O. items used under the agreement are its “Mythbusters” infographics, which debunk more than two dozen false notions about Covid-19. Future additions could include, for example, treatment guidelines for doctors, said Ryan Merkley, chief of staff at the Wikimedia Foundation, which produces Wikipedia.

If the arrangement works out, it could be extended to counter misinformation regarding AIDS, Ebola, influenza, polio and dozens of other diseases, Mr. Merkley said, “But this was something that just had to happen now.”

Eventually, live links will be established that would, for example, update global case and death numbers on Wikipedia as soon as the W.H.O. posts them, Mr. Pattison said.

The agency maintains its own website at www.who.int and has accounts on Twitter, Facebook, Instagram, LinkedIn, TikTok, Pinterest, Snapchat, YouTube and Twitch.

Both men said their organizations want the world to have accurate information about the disease.

Since the virus was discovered in January, Mr. Pattison has been leading the W.H.O.’s efforts to work with online platforms to fight what it called an “infodemic” of rumors.

The health agency collaborates with panels of moderators from each website, and also teaches short courses in covering medical information to journalists from various countries, including the United States.

Some rumors, like the belief that Covid-19 is caused by eating bat soup or that it can be cured by eating garlic or hot peppers, are fairly harmless or “just silly,” Mr. Pattison said.

But others, such as claims that the illness can be fought by drinking bleach or high-proof alcohol, can be lethal.

“More than 700 people in Iran were killed by that rumor that you should drink high-grade alcohol,” Mr. Pattison said.

The debunking effort has become more difficult as unfounded rumors have been repeated by influential people. Guests on Laura Ingraham’s show on Fox News have touted at least seven unproven Covid treatments, including hydroxychloroquine, antibiotics, vitamins, zinc and monoclonal antibodies targeted against other diseases.

President Trump backed hydroxychloroquine for weeks and publicly asked whether Americans should inject themselves with disinfectants or put ultraviolet lights — which can cause burns and break human DNA, which leads to cancer — inside their bodies.

Mr. Pattison said he had a staff of only five, although the agency subscribes to Newsguard, a service that hunts for new rumors springing up on the internet. His staff examines Newsguard alerts, consults medical experts, posts accurate information on the W.H.O. website and then calls its contacts at social media agencies and asks them to link to it.

In contrast, collaborating with Wikipedia “is like having an army to work with,” he said.

Wikipedia has about 5,200 Covid-related articles in 174 languages, Mr. Merkley said. More than 82,000 contributors have written or edited them, including 3,000 who worked on the main article in English Wikipedia.

Because some contributors insert errors or “make malicious changes,” he said, there are several levels of safeguards. Some pages can be “locked” and cannot be changed until one of more than 200 volunteer editors on WikiProject Covid-19, many of whom are doctors or academics, review it.

More than 1,100 volunteers have set alerts to notify them when any page they are interested in is changed. And, if necessary, changes by any account that has existed for less than 30 days can be blocked.

The W.H.O. also works with Google, but in a different way, Mr. Pattison said. For instance, Google analysts alerted his team that searches for an unfamiliar product as a Covid cure were peaking in Peru. The W.H.O. looked at the product, realized it was a type of bleach and alerted Google.

“They gave us $50 million worth of free ads on Google Peru,” he said.

The agency posted public service announcements that read, “Learn the truth about Covid and chlorine.”

“Users got them at the top of their lists of search results, and we could see the searches go way down,” Mr. Pattison said.

The W.H.O. has been consulted on rumors falsely claiming that masks cause people to black out, and on whether a “rainforest product” sold by the government of Madagascar really worked.

Because the W. H.O. must be careful never to insult a member government, Mr. Pattison released a carefully worded response saying there was no evidence for the product’s efficacy.

The W.H.O.’s in-house epidemiologists “are getting a bit annoyed at me,” Mr. Pattison said, because of his constant requests for detailed written explanations of, for instance, why thermometers do not cause brain damage or why a 5G wireless network cannot transmit a bat virus.

“I’m afraid my Christmas card list is getting shorter,” he said.


Continue Reading