# data[].attributes.body
Wired

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
If you're trying to get in shape and you want a tiny, wrist-bound computer to help you do it, you have more options than ever before. Fitness trackers come in all shapes, colors, and price tags, with newfangled sensors and features to stand out to customers. But for doctors and scientists studying how exercise can help people deal with disease, the landscape is much simpler. There's Fitbit, and then there's everyone else.

Like most fitness trackers, Fitbit's devices are far from perfect. They can count steps pretty well and give a good idea of activity levels day to day. But they haven't yet cracked the code on caloric burn-which is kind of a big deal for understanding weight loss. And the ones equipped with Fitbit's proprietary heart rate monitoring tech are on even shakier ground; the company is part of an ongoing class action lawsuit alleging dangerous inaccuracies. But that's not stopping a growing number of medical researchers from flocking to Fitbit for use in clinical studies of everything from arthritis to sleep apnea to cancer.

Since 2012, scientists have published 457 studies using Fitbit device data, nearly half of them in 2017 alone. According to a recent analysis in the Journal of the Federation of American Societies for Experimental Biology, that puts the company well ahead of its competition. In clinical trials that used consumer activity monitors, a full 83 percent outfitted trial participants with a Fitbit. For NIH-funded research, that number rose to 95 percent.

Some researchers, like Sheri Hartman, a psychologist at the University of California San Diego, gravitate toward Fitbit devices because they deliver information without being burdensome for her patients-breast cancer survivors struggling with brain fogginess and other cognitive declines following treatment. They just have to keep it charged and wear it, that's it. Fitbit, and its data-crunching research facilitation partner, Fitabase, do the rest.

Fitabase, if you haven't heard of it, is like Fitbit's personal digital plumber. The company has built a connection to Fitbit's API that allows it to pipe out user data to scientists. Since it launched in 2012, Fitabase has collected over 3.5 billion minutes of Fitbit data on behalf of research customers at places like John Hopkins, MD Anderson Cancer Center, and the Dana Farber Cancer Institute.

For Hartman, Fitabase collected three months' worth of data on a randomly-selected group of 43 women who had recently received chemotherapy or surgery for breast cancer. They, along with a control group which received health-related emails, were given the goal of exercising 150 minutes per week. Both groups were asked to wear a clinical-grade accelerometer for a week before and after the study to see how much their baseline activity had improved in three months' time. But only half of them received fitness trackers and access to a UCSD researcher to track their goals. Sticking with new lifestyle changes is hard, and Hartman's team was testing how well the wearables helped keep subjects accountable to their plans.

By the end of the study, published Tuesday in Cancer, they found that women who wore Fitbits were exercising for about 14 more minutes per day than those in the control group. And importantly, the more-active Fitbitters scored higher on an objective measure of cognitive processing speed. While it was the only one of nine examined areas of brain function that showed significant improvement, Hartman says the results are promising. "Breast cancer survivors have the highest rate of cognitive decline after treatments than any other types of cancer patients," she says. "We haven't had a lot of good recommendations for them. But now we can say exercise looks like it works." It was a small study, but Hartman has a larger one planned to see if the results hold up.

Others, like Carissa Low, a psychologist at the University of Pittsburgh Cancer Institute, landed on the Fitbit after testing it against other devices to see which ones synced most often and most reliably. Low studies how getting up and walking around can help cancer patients avoid readmission after surgery. In a small pilot she completed last year, daily step count predicted which patients wound up back in the hospital. She's now working on an interventional study to see if prodding people to exercise increases the likelihood of a better outcome. "We're not watching step counts in real time, but we do need to get the data without much of a lag," she says. "If we're trying to nudge somebody we don't want to be wrong, especially if they're sick."

Studies like these are helping to fill in some knowledge gaps about how motivating wearables are. There aren't many, if any, long-term studies of the devices, which most people stop wearing within the first six months. "If you just put a Fitbit on someone's wrist, that's not going to be enough to change behavior," says Mitesh Patel, an internist and digital health researcher at the University of Pennsylvania. "But if you combine it with incentives and other kinds of support, then there are a lot stronger effects. The question that remains, is if those effects remain over the long-term."

Steven Steinhubl, a cardiologist and the director of Digital Medicine at Scripps Translational Science Institute says wearable monitors shine most in research that compares you at one point in time to you at another. "If the goal is to specifically measure steps or calories with consumer technologies, it is difficult to compare different devices to each other," he says. "On the other hand, if tracking the trajectory for an individual over time, they are ideal."

While Fitbit says it's still a consumer health and wellness company, it doesn't deny it has eyes on one day getting a medical device designation. And with the company's stock price down 60 percent compared with this time last year and Apple threatening its market leadership, the medical sector might be Fitbit's best shot at a bright shiny tomorrow. So in the meantime, with the help of Fitabase, it's quietly building up a scientific body of evidence that should certainly come in handy with the FDA, if and when the agency ever comes knocking.

"From a clinical research perspective, we're really focused on engagement as well as longevity-keeping individuals on an activity protocol," says Fitbit's GM of Health Solutions Adam Pellegrini. He declined to say whether or not the company has immediate plans to move into the medical device market. "But as we start going deeper down the health road with more and more advanced sensors, I'd say, just stay tuned."

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Bored With Your Fitbit? These Cancer Researchers Aren't

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
If you're trying to get in shape and you want a tiny, wrist-bound computer to help you do it, you have more options than ever before. Fitness trackers come in all shapes, colors, and price tags, with newfangled sensors and features to stand out to customers.

# data[].attributes.body
Wired

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
You have to credit Samsung for its chutzpah. The company's tried every way it can think of to make its smartwatches happen, refining its line of Gear products year after year. Still, not even the latest Gear S3 -one of the best smartwatches on the market-was enough to put Samsung in the conversation with Apple on the smartwatch side, or Fitbit on the fitness side.

Now, Samsung's hoping to take on both Fitbit and Apple by introducing the only device you ever need on your wrist. Ahead of the IFA trade show, the company announced the Gear Sport, a durable smartwatch that's just as powerful as your average fitness tracker and way better looking. Samsung also announced a new version of its ugly Gear Fit fitness band, and an upgraded pair of its Gear IconX wireless earbuds. The buds might be worth a look, since they can track your workouts, store music, and chart your workout progress without the aid of your phone. Still, of the three, the Gear Sport has the best chance to really matter.

For starters, the Gear Sport looks a whole lot better than the other options on the market, including the hideous new Fitbit Ionic. Samsung gave it a round display and a slightly squared-off bezel, creating a rugged, Casio G-Shock kind of vibe. It's compatible with any 20mm watch band, so you can dress it up or down as you please-and it'll go four days between charges. You can tap on the 1.2-inch display to take calls, chat with Bixby, or control your smart-home devices. It also tracks workouts, plays music, and lets you go to Starbucks without your phone. At 11.6mm thick, it's still a hefty watch, but not unreasonably so-a Rolex Daytona measures 11.2mm. It's lighter, smaller, and slicker than the Gear S3, which was already among the best-looking smartwatches you could buy.

It's not just a watch, though. The Gear Sport is a supercharged fitness device with improved heart-rate monitoring, automated activity tracking, and a family of apps to seamlessly store all your data and serve up recommendations, thanks to a partnership with Under Armour. It can go into the pool without breaking, and track your swimming in the process with the Speedo app. Samsung also worked with Spotify to allow you to download playlists to the watch (at least until you fill the 4 gig capacity), which gives it a big edge over the Apple Watch. It's not nearly the fitness beast Fitbit launched, which tracks your breathing and oxygen consumption and all sorts of other crazy things, but Samsung's offering a lot of the same features in a much more attractive package.

If we're talking Gear Sport versus Apple Watch, the divide is simple: The Apple Watch works on Apple devices, and the Gear Sport works on Android. Sure, the Gear Sport technically supports iOS, just like the Gear S3. But you can't do much of anything with a Gear Sport and an iPhone. (Which is fine! Buy an Apple Watch, ya goober.) For Androiders, the Gear Sport fills in nicely.

The Gear Sport's wildcard, as always, lies within its Tizen operating system. It doesn't have as many apps as Android Wear or Apple's WatchOS, and using a Gear Sport means swapping Google Assistant for Bixby, which definitely qualifies as a downgrade. Still, Tizen has become dramatically more usable over the years, and at least holds its own when it comes to fitness and notifications. It's even better if you use other Samsung devices, but works fine across the Android universe.

As of now, three different smartwatches line the top of the market. The Apple Watch is winning, and the Fitbit Ionic hopes it can win over people who care more about fitness than style. Samsung's betting that a lot of Android users are looking for something that looks like a watch and works like a Fitbit. That's what it made.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Samsung Gear Sport Takes on Fitbit and Apple in One Device

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
You have to credit Samsung for its chutzpah. The company's tried every way it can think of to make its smartwatches happen, refining its line of Gear products year after year. Still, not even the latest Gear S3 -one of the best smartwatches on the market-was enough to put Samsung in the conversation with Apple on the smartwatch side, or Fitbit on the fitness side.

# data[].attributes.body
Wired

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Fitbit's Charge 3 Offers a New Take on an Old Tracker

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
This year, Fitbit finally figured out how to make a smartwatch people really like, while sales of its lightweight activity trackers have been on the decline. But that's not stopping the company from putting out new activity tracking wristbands. It just announced its newest device: the Fitbit Charge 3.

# data[].attributes.body
Wired

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
As Japan entered the 1960s, everything seemed to be in motion. Construction swept through Tokyo as the city prepared to host its first Olympic Games. The Tōkaidō Shinkansen, the original bullet train, sped along the southern coast of Honshu. More cars filled the roads. The only thing not moving, it seemed, were people's legs.

Prosperity fostered convenience, which encouraged inactivity-or so a doctor reportedly told the founder of Yamasa Tokei Keiki. In response, the company released the world's first commercial pedometer, the manpo-kei. Kei means "meter," and manpo, "10,000 steps."

In East Asia, 10,000 had long been shorthand for plenty, or even infinite vastness, but affixed to a fitness gadget the number solidified. Once a medical researcher endorsed 10,000 steps as the threshold for being an "active" adult, manpo crossed from idiom to science and, in the process, became the best kind of goal: exact, plausible, and resettable. Didn't get to 10,000? Tomorrow is another day. A wave of walking clubs overtook Japan.

Fitbit sold 21.4 million devices in 2015, the year it went public, and 22.3 million in 2016. Then smartwatches happened.

Americans, wedded to their own conveniences, were slow to catch up. Sure, running took root as a pastime in the '70s, and an '80s fervor for "mall walking" led to hordes of retirees Rockporting their way through suburban gallerias. But quantified stepping didn't come to US shores until 2008, courtesy of entrepreneurs James Park and Eric Friedman. "I had been working like crazy at startups over the last three years and really let myself go in terms of fitness," Park said at the time.

Not long after, he and Friedman released the Fitbit Tracker. It looked like a clothespin had mated with a stapler: a tiny matte-black pincer with an even tinier lowercase fitbit printed in light gray, a handy reminder when you inevitably found it in the dryer. (Googling "fitbit laundry" pulls up nearly 15 million results.) A single button cycled through the display so you could see your march toward that magical 10,000, rendered as a blue flower. "Keep moving to keep the flower growing," read the user manual. A botanical Tamagotchi, feeding off your efforts.

There were numbers too-and oh, the numbers. They were our eyes turned inward, the power to see what our bodies had done and were doing. Metabolic rhythms, miraculous alchemies, made quantifiable for the first time outside our medical charts. We became mech pilots, armed with a brand-new instrument panel to steer our clumsy selves through the world. When you logged in to check your mech's maintenance records- How many calories has it burned this week? How many times does it wake up on an average night? -you saw those of your fellow pilots as well.

I remember the game. Not only did I have manpo to keep pace with, but mankind itself. The college buddy whose new role as father was snaring him 4,000 steps before the workday started. The colleague who walked to work while I took the bus like a sucker. Hell, I once strapped my tracker around my ankle for a four-hour bike ride, spinning up a European vacation's worth of footfalls. The prize was an anguished email from a rival wondering how I'd juiced my total.

As Fitbit introduced new products, the deceptions diversified. One step-fluffer taped his tracker to an electric saw blade and left it on overnight. Others gave their Fitbits to their dogs. Compared to them, my favorite hack-brushing my teeth like a coke-addled drum major-seemed downright Calvinist.

By 2014, Fitbit had a 67 percent share of the activity-tracking marketplace. It sold 21.4 million devices in 2015, the year it went public, and 22.3 million in 2016. Then smartwatches happened. If you were a serious athlete, you were more likely to upgrade to a serious device, with structured workouts and advanced metrics. If you weren't, something like an Apple Watch just looked a lot cooler and worked with the rest of your app-driven life. By 2017, Fitbit's stock had dropped by more than half. Slowly at first, and then faster, the OG fitness tracker tumbled into the gap in the middle.

It made sense. At first, being a mech was fun-the numbers, the feedback, the idea that you could use it all to make yourself healthier, better. But in the decade since the Fitbit was born, another feedback device emerged and demanded even more attention. It, too, showed you glimpses of other people's lives, or at least the lives they wanted you to think they led. But your smartphone didn't bother with flower power. It asked not for your effort but for your time, and there was little reward.

Spurred by sales of its own watch, Fitbit's stock has recently twitched back to life. Meanwhile, more and more people are taking steps to distance themselves from their technological dependencies. These aren't literal steps. But they might be the healthiest steps of all.

Peter Rubin (@provenself, WIRED senior editor and self-tracking runner.
This article appears in the September issue. Subscribe now.
More Great WIRED Stories

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
How Fitbit Started the Wearables Craze and Got Us All Moving

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
As Japan entered the 1960s, everything seemed to be in motion. Construction swept through Tokyo as the city prepared to host its first Olympic Games. The Tōkaidō Shinkansen, the original bullet train, sped along the southern coast of Honshu. More cars filled the roads. The only thing not moving, it seemed, were people's legs.

# data[].attributes.body
Hustle

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
sign up today to receive our daily news briefs featuring a handful of the most important stories in business, tech, and life

San Francisco-based health-tracking company, Cardiogram, has released clinical studies showing its machine-learning model, DeepHeart, can use Apple Watch data to forecast potential health ailments.

Among the watch's purported powers: the ability to predict abnormal heart rhythms with 97% accuracy, sleep apnea with 90% accuracy, diabetes with 85% accuracy, and hypertension with 82% accuracy.

Diagnosing with data (not medicine)

To put health information generated by wearable devices like Apple Watch or Fitbit into operation, engineers at Cardiogram (mostly ex-Googlers) turned not to medicine, but to big data.

By adapting speech-recognition software to synthesize health data instead of words, Cardiogram stumbled upon a way to accurately predict a disease without knowing anything about its cause.

So, DeepHeart will tell you that you have diabetes - but not how it knows.

Health insurance and big tech stole each other's hearts

The FDA makes it illegal for wearables to make true medical diagnoses, but the savings made possible by fitness-tracking and diagnostic "recommendations" still have health insurance companies drooling.

Aetna, John Hancock, and UnitedHealthcare all have programs that reward members for using wearable devices to increase fitness and improve health.

Big tech spent about 10 times as much on health-related deals in 2017 (at least $2.7B) as it did in 2012 ($277m) - and if the money continues to flow, expect to see companies like Cardiogram pumping it through the veins of a new data-driven healthcare system.

Get news (like this) delivered by email every morning

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Your watch knows you'll get sick, but it doesn't know why

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
sign up today to receive our daily news briefs featuring a handful of the most important stories in business, tech, and life San Francisco-based health-tracking company, Cardiogram, has released clinical studies showing its machine-learning model, DeepHeart, can use Apple Watch data to forecast potential health ailments.

# data[].attributes.body
Hustle

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
sign up today to receive our daily news briefs featuring a handful of the most important stories in business, tech, and life

At its annual iPhone fun-fest in Cupertino yesterday, Apple unveiled a new line of expensive iPhones and a redesigned, health-conscious Watch.

Bigger, brighter, and pricier

Apple's newest iPhone - the oxymoronically named " XS Max " - is the Macmakers' biggest smartphone yet, measuring up at 6.5 inches across and $1,099 deep (into your wallet, that is).

The Max's siblings also have XS-ive price points (the XS at $999 and the XR at $749) - all predictably more expensive than last year's new phones.

Apple's annual price increases have become a rite of passage - testament to the company's powerful brand that keeps people coming back for more, even if it means taking out a second mortgage.

Wearable companies better Watch out

Apple also unveiled its new Series 4 Watch - a bigger, faster $399 piece of wrist-candy with a built-in EKG that monitors heart rate. The new heart-monitor feature positions Apple's watches as potential lifesavers, not mere exercise aids.

And, Apple's entry into the health-wearable game raised some heart rates for competitors: Fitbit's stock dropped more than 6% in response to the announcement.

Get news (like this) delivered by email every morning

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Apple unveils a heart-tracking watch alongside heart-stopping prices

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
sign up today to receive our daily news briefs featuring a handful of the most important stories in business, tech, and life At its annual iPhone fun-fest in Cupertino yesterday, Apple unveiled a new line of expensive iPhones and a redesigned, health-conscious Watch.

# data[].attributes.body
Hustle

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
sign up today to receive our daily news briefs featuring a handful of the most important stories in business, tech, and life

Apple rolled out its updated health app yesterday, offering a tool that enables American Apple customers to read electrical heart signals simply by pressing a finger against a smartwatch.

But with Apple's future as a world-leading tech giant on the line, Apple may need heart monitoring more than its customers do.

Apple really wants your health data

Apple has been raising the prices on its hardware (which is still its bread and butter) for years. But the time will come when consumers won't be willing to pay $6k for the iPhone 19Z.

This reliance on hardware is already a problem: After hitting a $1T market cap, Apple has lost more than $295B in value since August.

So Apple has already started to focus on services to wean itself off of hardware - and it seems to be pinning its hopes on health.

But do you really want Apple's health services?

It's clear why Apple wants to kick-start sales of its healthcare services. But doctors are divided on the usefulness of the watch.

Apple's Watch is now FDA-approved to catch irregular heartbeats (a definite win for people who don't know they have them), but some doctors think they could do more harm than good in the short term by causing misdiagnosis and anxiety.

But more importantly, this FDA approval opens the door for Apple to become what it calls an "intelligent health guardian" - a hardware company that also collects medically sensitive healthcare data.

Get news (like this) delivered by email every morning

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Apple Watch now does ECG -- but will an Apple a day really keep the doctor away?

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
sign up today to receive our daily news briefs featuring a handful of the most important stories in business, tech, and life Apple rolled out its updated health app yesterday, offering a tool that enables American Apple customers to read electrical heart signals simply by pressing a finger against a smartwatch.

# data[].attributes.body
Wired

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
One of the most surprising announcements at Apple's annual hardware event on Wednesday wasn't a new iPhone, or even the new, thinner, next-generation Apple Watch. It was a feature on the Apple Watch.

"We've added electrodes into the back sapphire crystal and the digital crown, allowing you to take an electrocardiogram," said COO Jeff Williams, eliciting one of the day's biggest rounds of applause. "This is the first ECG product offered over the counter, directly to consumers."

Let's ignore for now whether Apple's new watch really is the first direct-to-consumer ECG ( It's not.) The bigger question is whether it's a good idea in the first place. Healthcare providers usually use ECGs in hospitals to measure the heart's electrical activity and detect abnormalities in its rhythm. But with the latest iteration of its smartwatch, Apple wants to put an ECG on your wrist that you can use "anytime, anywhere."

It sounds like a great idea in theory. Even Ivor Benjamin, president of the American Heart Association, showed up to give Apple props. "The AHA is a relentless force for a world of longer, healthier lives," Benjamin said on stage Wednesday. "Products that seek to provide deeper health insights, like the Apple Watch Series 4, offer great potential in getting us there."

People with atrial fibrillation, which the CDC estimates affects between 2.7 and 6.1 million Americans, could likely benefit from a wearable, on-demand ECG device like the new Apple Watch. (AFib is the most common arrhythmia, and the only kind Apple's watch is approved to detect.) But for everyone else, evidence suggests the potential costs could actually outweigh the proposed benefits. Despite what Benjamin says, there is such a thing as too much insight into one's health.

The question of ECG's usefulness as a screening tool is older than you probably realize. When they first came on the scene, physicians used them to screen patients with known or suspected heart issues. It wasn't long before healthcare providers starting using them to examine patients with no symptoms or family history of cardiovascular illness.

There's no exact numbers on how common preventive ECG screening is in the US, but according to a recent editorial in the Journal of American Medicine, ECG examinations of asymptomatic patients had become regular features of annual physicals by the early aughts-until professional societies ran cost/benefit analyses on the practice and started advising against it.

One of those societies was the US Preventive Services Task Force. An independent, volunteer panel of national experts in disease prevention and evidence-based medicine, the task force has been issuing recommendations on the value of electrocardiography screening for more than a decade. In 2004, the panel reached no firm conclusion on the value of using ECG to screen for heart disease in asymptomatic adults, citing a lack of studies on patient outcomes. But by 2012, it had revised its statement, recommending against ECG screening in asymptomatic adults at low risk for heart disease.

In 2018, the group revisited the matter yet again, but its assessment stayed the same. "The USPSTF recommends against screening for cardiovascular disease with resting or exercise ECG in adults at low risk of cardiovascular disease events," the panel wrote in its latest statement, which appeared in JAMA this past June.

As for screening asymptomatic adults at high- or intermediate-risk of heart disease, the task force says there's insufficient evidence. And in a separate statement published in JAMA just last month, the panel had the same to say about ECG screening for atrial fibrillation, specifically.

The upshot is that not many studies have looked at the effects of widespread ECG screening, and those that have have found that it provides no meaningful advantage. Same goes for regular echocardiographic screening-a different but related method of assessing heart health. In 2013, a large-scale, randomized clinical trial published in JAMA Internal Medicine found that widespread echocardiographic screening of healthy adults had no impact on health outcomes.

"Do you wind up catching a few undiagnosed cases? Sure. But for the vast majority of people it will have either no impact or possibly a negative impact by causing anxiety or unnecessary treatment," says cardiologist Theodore Abraham, director of the UCSF Echocardiography Laboratory. The more democratized you make something like ECG, he says, the more you increase the rate of false positives-especially among the hypochondriac set. "In the case of people who are very type-A, obsessed with their health, and fitness compulsive, you could see a lot of them overusing Apple's tech to self-diagnose and have themselves checked out unnecessarily."

The cases in which Apple's new watch could be most helpful are obvious: People with atrial fibrillation, family histories of heart disease, heart palpitations, chest pain, shortness of breath, and so on. Sometimes, Abraham says, patients come in with vague cardiovascular symptoms that they can't reproduce during their visit. Folks like that, he says, often require more expensive, prescription-based monitoring systems. If a doctor could ask that kind of patient to record their symptoms on a gadget they already own, that could be a win for the healthcare provider and the patient.

As for everyone else, it's hard to say what benefit Apple Watch's on-demand ECG could have, and existing evidence suggests it might actually do more harm than good.

There is, however, the matter of life-saving potential to consider, which AHA president Ivor Benjamin mentioned not once but twice in his presentation at yesterday's Apple Event. If there's a silver lining to putting electrocardiograms on every Apple Watch wearer's wrist, it's that their data (if they choose to share it-Apple emphasized at the event that your data is yours to do with as you please) could help researchers resolve the uncertainty surrounding ECG screening in seemingly healthy people. Apple's new wearable might not be the handy heart-health tool it's advertised as, but it could, with your permission, make you a research subject.

More Great WIRED Stories

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
The New ECG Apple Watch Could Do More Harm Than Good

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
One of the most surprising announcements at Apple's annual hardware event on Wednesday wasn't a new iPhone, or even the new, thinner, next-generation Apple Watch. It was a feature on the Apple Watch. "We've added electrodes into the back sapphire crystal and the digital crown, allowing you to take an electrocardiogram," said COO Jeff Williams, eliciting one of the day's biggest rounds of applause.

# data[].attributes.body
Hustle

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
sign up today to receive our daily news briefs featuring a handful of the most important stories in business, tech, and life

Back in November, fitness tracking app Strava published the Global Heatmap - a seemingly cool interactive that used 13 trillion GPS points to show where people were the most active between 2015 and 2017.

But the feature came with a "major security oversight:" turns out, soldiers use fitness trackers too - and their movements, which show up on the map, were used to pinpoint the location of US military bases .

How's that?

On the map, populated areas are illuminated with the activity of millions of users. But in sparser areas (i.e. "war zones"), the map is pitch black - and upon closer examination, one can make out faint outlines of activity in or around US military bases.

The revelation was first pointed out on Twitter , and within hours, many users had used the map to identify secret CIA sites in Somalia, missile systems in Yemen, and US Special Operations bases in Africa.

The data, said one analyst , offers "a mine of information to anyone who wants to attack or ambush US troops in or around the bases."

Whose fault is this?

Strava does offer users an enhanced privacy mode that allows them to opt out of data sharing - though the app's privacy settings have come under heat in the past for not being very straightforward.

Still, soldiers probably shouldn't be publicly tracking their locations - or even using these devices at all.

And the blame for that falls partly on our government: the Pentagon has openly endorsed the usage of Fitbits among military members as far back as 2013.

Get news (like this) delivered by email every morning

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Strava's heat map is a huge security screw-up

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
sign up today to receive our daily news briefs featuring a handful of the most important stories in business, tech, and life Back in November, fitness tracking app Strava published the Global Heatmap - a seemingly cool interactive that used 13 trillion GPS points to show where people were the most active between 2015 and 2017.

# data[].attributes.body
Hustle

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
6 current and former Fitbit employees have been hit with a federal indictment over the theft of trade secrets from one-time rival, and early bluetooth wearables pioneer, Jawbone.

The indictment alleges each defendant knew that the trade secrets were stolen and that they were possessed without authorization.

According to court documents, the individuals had all worked for the now-defunct Jawbone for at least a year between 2011 and 2015, before being employed by Fitbit.

Which is right when it all began

Shortly after Fitbit filed for an IPO in 2015, Jawbone filed 3 lawsuits in less than two months against their wearables foe for attempting to "systematically plunder" talent, intellectual property, and trade secrets (300k confidential files-worth).

In 2016, a judge ruled in Fitbit's favor finding that "no Jawbone trade secrets were misappropriated or used in any Fitbit product, feature, or technology."

However, the fight continued over the other patent discrepancies, until the companies reached a global settlement agreement resolving all outstanding litigation in December 2017.

But by then, Jawbone had already gone out of business

Founded in 1999, the company was one of the OG makers of bluetooth headsets before they diversified into fitness bands and speakers (one of the early innovators in the revolutionary Jambox craze).

According to The Information (paywall), the consumer electronics firm was once valued at $3B, but their early success was swiftly overshadowed by other copycat competitors (like Fitbit), plus costly mistakes in design and manufacturing, that eventually led to their demise in 2017.

And now, here we are again

Jawbone co-founder and CEO Hosain Rahman has since founded a health-related software and hardware company called Jawbone Health that will be servicing not only Jawbone's devices moving forward, but also the new litigation.

In a statement to , Jawbone Health said these indictments further validate their claims made back in 2015.

The 6 employees are scheduled to make a first court appearance on July 9, and could face up to 10 years in prison if convicted.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Fitbit employees charged with stealing trade secrets from ex-rival Jawbone

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
6 current and former Fitbit employees have been hit with a federal indictment over the theft of trade secrets from one-time rival, and early bluetooth wearables pioneer, Jawbone. The indictment alleges each defendant knew that the trade secrets were stolen and that they were possessed without authorization.

# data[].attributes.body
Hustle

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
sign up today to receive our daily news briefs featuring a handful of the most important stories in business, tech, and life

Yesterday was a big earnings day for tech companies - and a wild night for their stocks. Here's a roundup of 3 stocks that turned upside down after-hours yesterday:

Tesla reports historic losses, sending stock way up

Yep, you read that right. The electric car company announced losses of $717.5m in Q2, the largest in the company's volatile history. But Tesla lost money efficiently - reducing expenditures from $3.4B to an estimated $2.5B this year and finishing the quarter with $2.2B in cash.

Now that the company has hit its target of producing 5k Model 3s a week, analysts are betting the company will be profitable this year - sending stock up more than 11% after-hours.

Square had a great year, sending its stock downhill

Square announced that sales last quarter increased 60%, beating analysts' projections. By diversifying its offerings, the company managed to nearly double in size over the past year.

But, investors seemed to think the good news at Square was too good to be true. After raising its own bar, Square slightly lowered its forecast for next quarter - enough to send the company's stock down as much as 2.5% after-hours, despite its strong performance.

Despite losses, Fitbit gets it

Fitbit announced a $118.3m quarterly net loss yesterday, revealing overall revenue had fallen to $299.3m from $353.3m at this time last year.

Yet, in spite of the rough financials, Fitbit announced that the selling price of its wearables increased 6% on the year - a vote of confidence for smartwatches. Fitbit's faith-driven smartwatch forecast was enough to send the 'Bit's stock up 6.4% after hours.

Get news (like this) delivered by email every morning

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
An after-dark earnings roundup: 3 stocks that had a crazier night than you did yesterday

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
sign up today to receive our daily news briefs featuring a handful of the most important stories in business, tech, and life Yesterday was a big earnings day for tech companies - and a wild night for their stocks.

# data[].attributes.body
Hustle

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
sign up today to receive our daily news briefs featuring a handful of the most important stories in business, tech, and life

Sonos stock fell more than 20% after the company announced that its revenue had declined 6.6% from the previous year. Following an underwhelming August IPO, Sonos seemed to get back on track with a stock price around $20 (up from an initial $15).

But, Monday's earnings report shows that growth is slowing

Unfortunately for Sonos, the $208m in revenue that it reported for Q3 actually exceeded analysts' expectations - suggesting that investors may have had unrealistic expectations for the company's performance.

Even worse, some fear that the smart-speaker company could be the next victim of the consumer hardware curse.

Trying not to go the way of the GoPro

Other tech hardware companies have also struggled to sustain stock prices after inflated IPOs. GoPro shares soared to $86.97 and Fitbit hit $47.60 before they fell back to less than $7 and $6 today due to market saturation.

Like GoPro and Fitbit products, Sonos' expensive high-end speakers have a limited addressable market. But to make matters even worse for Sonos, the smart speaker market is also becoming increasingly crowded with tech titans such as Apple, Google, and Amazon.

So far, Sonos has kept hungry rivals at bay by digging itself a patent moat. But while the moat may work in the short run, Sonos will eventually need more than patents to protect itself from trillion-dollar troublemakers like Apple and Amazon.

Get news (like this) delivered by email every morning

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Say it ain't Sonos: As smart speaker revenue slips, stock nosedives 20%

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
sign up today to receive our daily news briefs featuring a handful of the most important stories in business, tech, and life Sonos stock fell more than 20% after the company announced that its revenue had declined 6.6% from the previous year.