Co-founder of Landing jobs on Shifting Job Dynamics in 2020!

December 8, 2023

Pedro Oliveira, Co-founder of Landing Jobs sheds light on how there's less confidence hiring because of the pandemic, downside in supply side, more active talent, passive talent becoming more passive, biggest changes, salary negotiations, change in policies, remote working, future of work, empathic communications, distribution, coping up and surving and more

https://youtu.be/XBVBU155fhI?si=SPsa2f3iByREwU6y

Tags

Video Interview Future of Work Jobs Remote working Future Founders Talent Recruitment Remote Work Supply Chain Unemployment Job Displacement

Via News Video

Video content and multimedia coverage from Via News, bringing you visual insights into markets, business, and finance.

What we know · the intelligence behind this page

Live from the substrate

What we're seeing

Vertical AI Agents Attract a Funding Wave Across Fintech-Adjacent Industries

A cluster of AI-native startups applying autonomous agents to narrow, operational problems — hotel front-desk staffing (Dextr AI), identity/fraud risk for financial institutions (Baselayer), insurance distribution (Napo, Connie Health, MGT Insurance) — closed seed-to-Series A rounds within days of each other in September 2026, with CB Insights running a coordinated CEO interview series to spotlight them. The pattern points to agentic AI maturing from generic chat tools into vertical, revenue-generating products, with identity verification for AI agents themselves (Baselayer) emerging as a new fintech infrastructure category responding directly to AI-driven fraud risk.

Our read on the data ›

Signals we're tracking

Satellite-Terrestrial Network Integration Acceleration

Increased investment and launches in hybrid satellite-cellular networks across telecom industry; competitive responses from other carriers; regulatory activity around satellite spectrum; expansion of emergency/rural connectivity use cases

Patterns we're watching ›

Where sources disagree

ING Group

Both facts record the same metric (shares_outstanding) for ING Group at the identical observation date (2025-12-31). FACT A states 2,902,437,688 shares; FACT B states 2,902 million shares (2,902,000,000). The difference is 437,688 shares (~0.015%). This is a genuine value conflict, though the discrepancy appears to result from FACT B rounding to the nearest million while FACT A provides the precise count.

We flag conflicts openly ›

Recently verified

✓ Checked against the original source

4,984

facts traced to their source — and we flag the ones that don't hold up.

101 entities tracked4,984 facts checked against source5,306 source documents archived

Query this data → isubstrate.com

Categories

Tags