Mediaboss Marketing

Among the many differences between older social software and post-Facebook social software is the peculiar flatness of the newer platforms. Older tools recognizing that the user of social software is the group, not the individual empowered those invested in health of communities with tools to help keep the community healthy. Effective social software was oriented not toward the average member of a community, but toward the communitys stewards. Thats why, for example, Wikipedia foregrounds to users an array of information useful to making quick judgments about editors, edits, and claims on articles History tab. Its why the bread and butter of community blogging systems was different levels of trusted user status, and why BBS tools showcased moderation features over user capabilities.

Platforms split community management from community activity, and were still feeling the effects of that. Wikipedia has a half dozen different access levels and at least a dozen specialized roles. Twitter has one role: user. But even though specialized formal roles dont exist, different patterns of influence do, and this has been woefully underutilized in the fight against misinformation.

Thats why my prediction for the coming year is that at least one platform will engage with its most influential users, giving them access to special tools and training to identify and contextualize sources and claims in their feeds. This will allow platforms to split the difference between a clutter-free onboarding for Aunt Jane and a full-featured verification and sourcing interface for users whose every retweet goes out to hundreds of thousands of people, or whose page or group serves as an information hub for users and activists. These tools and training will also eventually be released to the general public, though for the general public, they will default to off.

Until recently, most online communities put resources into making sure that those with influence had tools to exercise that influence responsibly, built right into the main interface. Its time for platforms to follow suit.

And heres a bonus prediction, this one for online information literacy. Over the past few years, much of the focus in infolit has been on trustworthiness, truth, and bias. While the truth sometimes is clear cut, and the intentions of those working in media literacy are good, putting these things at the core of any large public initiative can be problematic. Trustworthiness, for example, is often seen through an explicit news agenda, where journalistic processes are seen as a platonic ideal to which other types of information should aspire. Bias, if anything, ends up being too powerful a tool, allowing students to filter out almost any publication as unworthy of their attention.

For the past several years, weve been taking a different tack. Weve been asking students a simple question: What context should you have before engaging with a particular piece of content? And if you share this content, what context should you provide to those with whom you share?

While weve been doing this for its pedagogical benefits, a recent public project has made me realize that it is an approach uniquely sensitive to community values, and, as such may provide a starting point for broad educational initiatives. Truth is a battleground, trustworthiness a minefield. Yet even in these divided times, most people agree that one should know the relevant context of what one reads and shares. Its as close to a universal value as we have these days.

Because these issues will become more salient as broader adoption is pursued, I predict that online information literacy initiatives will begin to pivot from trust as an organizing principle to the reconstruction of missing context.

Mike Caulfield is head of the Digital Polarization Initiative of the American Democracy Project.

Excerpt from:
Native verification tools for the blue checkmark crowd - Nieman Journalism Lab at Harvard

If you didnt buy the Resident Evil 2 reboot on PC because of the DRM it was shackled with, then we have some good news: Capcom has stripped out the Denuvo anti-tamper tech from the game.

As reported by DSO Gaming, the decision was made by the Japanese team to ditch the Denuvo DRM, which is a controversial antipiracy system. Mainly because games are seemingly cracked pretty swiftly anyway, so really its the genuine gamers who and up suffering the inconvenience

An inconvenience which, at least according to anecdotal reports weve previously seen on Reddit, may include a slight frame rate slowdown, at least on lower-spec PCs although we have to treat such speculation with a great deal of caution.

That said, the DRM definitely uses some resources, its just a question of whether that workload might have any realistically noticeable performance impact or not as weve seen previously in other releases, there remain allegations levelled at the Denuvo software in terms of potentially slowing load times and frame rates.

At any rate, those who may have been holding off buying whats one of the best games of 2019 because of that DRM, need hold off no longer.

We rated Resident Evil 2 very highly in our review, praising the stunning graphics of the remake, and concluding that its a masterful modern survival horror experience. And now a masterful modern survival horror DRM-free experience, to boot.

You probably also saw that the Resident Evil 3 remake has just been officially announced, and will arrive on April 3, 2020 complete with a 1v4 multiplayer offering.

More here:
The best remake of 2019 just got even better as Resident Evil 2 ditches controversial DRM - TechRadar

GRAND RAPIDS, MI -- In the face of increased gun violence and homicides, Grand Rapids is looking to upgrade its technological support.

Police department leadership and city officials are exploring whether or not to pursue the use of drones and ShotSpotter systems to reduce response time for incidents of violence and other emergencies.

The city hasnt made any decisions regarding additional technology, but police leaders and city officials are beginning the discussions. That included an introductory conversation with the public safety committee Tuesday, Dec. 17, at City Hall.

ShotSpotter is a technology that uses about 20 acoustic sensors per square mile to detect gunfire, determine where it came from, and notify police in less than 45 seconds. The system can send data to police including a precise location on a map, number of rounds fired and type of gunfire.

ShotSpotter is used in more than 85 cities across the country and is used as a component to prevent and reduce gun violence. It allows officers to respond to shootings without waiting on someone in the community to call it in.

This isnt the first time Grand Rapids has considered acquiring ShotSpotter. In April 2015, the city considered a $1.2 million, 4-year deployment plan but put off voting on it.

Then-commissioner Dave Shaffer said he preferred using that money to hire more police officers. Ofc. Andy Bingel, president of the police officers union, called the technology a money pit and said adding officers was a higher priority.

Since then, City Manager Mark Washington and multiple city commissioners have expressed interest in reconsidering the technology. The Rev. Jerry Bishop, pastor for a church on the citys Southeast Side, has also been a vocal advocate of ShotSpotter.

We are looking at policy and we would work with the community to develop it, said Police Chief Eric Payne. Ive had discussions about this concept ... for the most part, its been positive. People have raised the concerns that I feel we could address to the satisfaction of the community and the commission.

Cities including New York, Denver, Sacramento, Fresno, San Diego and Louisville reported that a significant number of ShotSpotter alerts did not have an associated 911 call, meaning officers would likely not have known about the gunfire without the technology.

In Fresno, police response time from a ShotSpotter alert was four minutes, compared to the eight-minute response to a citizen 911 call, Fresno Police Chief Jerry Dyer reported to ShotSpotter.

On Tuesday, Deputy Chief David Kiddle said cities that have been using ShotSpotter have seen significant reductions in gunfire.

The technology is estimated to cost about $65,000 per square mile per year.

The city manager asked that we bring it up and were looking at it, Kiddle said. We would get community feedback, which last time we failed to do sufficiently.

Most of Tuesdays technology discussion revolved around acquiring drones, which can be used for first response, tactical incidents, traffic crash investigation and crime scene investigation.

The highest priority, Kiddle said, would be first response. He cited the only other police department using drones for such -- Chula Vista, California -- as an example for the value of considering drones.

Of the 1,144 calls in which the drone was sent out as a first responder between Oct 22, 2018 and Dec. 3, 2019:

Im hoping to bring this presentation to the committee of the whole with a policy, Kiddle said. I know itll be controversial. We want to work with the community to see how we can use drones effectively within guidelines.

In Chula Vista, the police department has an individual who controls the drone. It is only deployed following a 911 call, and doesnt record until it reaches the scene, according to police.

Here are some examples of the benefits Chula Vista has seen with its drone program:

The Grand Rapids Police Department hopes to have public discussions about the technology, with the goal of initiating a pilot program by spring 2020.

Kiddle said Motorola would be interested in sponsoring the pilot program at no cost to the city. He said the drones typically cost a couple thousand dollars but he didnt know the cost of the software.

City commissioners on the public safety committee who heard Tuesdays presentation include Joe Jones, Nate Moody and Kurt Reppart, as well as commissioner-to-be Milinda Ysasi.

Reppart said he pulled a group of residents together to talk about the technology. He was surprised how open they were to certain aspects, but said they were concerned about a slippery slope regarding the use of drones once the department adds them to its arsenal.

See the article here:
Drones, ShotSpotter to be considered by Grand Rapids police - MLive.com

RUGBY UNION | STEPHEN JONES

December 15 2019, 12:01am,The Sunday Times

Stephen Jones, Rugby correspondent

More than 75% of Kiwis do not want Ian Foster to coach the All Blacks, and for good reason

Was Englands evisceration of New Zealand in the semi-final of the World Cup even more significant than we thought at the time? It was certainly a sensational sporting soaking, perhaps the most one-sided knockout game of any World Cup. But was it also the end of the All Black epoch? Was it Gotterdammerung, the Twilight of the Gods? There was certainly an air of finality. Kieran Read, the long-serving and celebrated captain, walked off into the sunset of retirement. Coach Steve Hansen and Brodie Retallick, the lock, left for the softest of existences available in professional rugby, the Japan League; three icons Ryan Crotty, Ben Smith and the sharply overrated Sonny Bill Williams had all played their last for the All Blacks.

Last

Want to read more?

Subscribe now and get unlimited digital access on web and our smartphone and tablet apps, free for your first month.

Read more here:
New Zealand head coach Ian Foster taking on the toughest job in rugby - The Times

Johann van Graan backed his players to make the right on-pitch decisions after Munster missed a chance to rescue a losing bonus point in a 15-6 defeat at Saracens today.

Munster had a late penalty to move within seven points of last seasons Heineken Champions Cup winners in north London but instead of kicking for goal, stand-in captain CJ Stander and his leadership group opted to go for a try and kicked for the corner.

The resulting lineout came to nothing and Munster now go into the last two rounds on 11 points, just a point in front of Saracens and six adrift of Racing 92 at the top of Pool 4 with a trip to Paris to play the table-toppers on January 12.

Head coach van Graan refused to criticise the Munster players for their call and insisted the chance to qualify for the knockout stages was still up for grabs.

"You always back the decisions on the pitch, they decided to go to the corner and unfortunately it didn't work out for us, van Graan said.

"But there's a lot of rugby left in this pool, the fact Saracens didn't get four tries means it's 17, 11, 10 if I'm not mistaken.

"The Paris game becomes a knockout game for us now, we need to go and win in Paris."

Despite losing skipper Peter OMahony to a groin problem during the warm-up and then seeing fellow back-rower Tadhg Beirne leave the game on a stretcher with an ankle or lower leg injury after just 10 minutes, then prop John Ryan to a calf injury before the half-hour mark, Munster held their own against a near full-strength Saracens side and broke a half-time deadlock with a 44th-minute JJ Hanrahan penalty to move into as 6-3 lead.

A mass brawl between the teams soon afterwards that had appeared to have been sparked by an argument between Saracens hooker Jamie George and Munster doctor Jamie Kearns, handed the visitors another penalty as the home side looked rattled but Hanrahan pushed his kicked wide.

Saracens rallied from that point and tries from Sean Maitland and Mako Vunipola sealed their win, much to Munsters frustration.

It's disappointing, we came here to win, van Graan said. We were in the game for large parts of it, but unfortunately in the last 20 minutes they were applying pressure in our 22 and they went for multiple scrums and scored the try that put us under huge pressure

"I felt their bench made a big impact and we lost Pete in the warm-up, Tadhg pretty early, John Ryan pretty early... we were quite thin there at the end.

"It was an incredibly tough game of rugby against the champions in their backyard but I'm incredibly proud of our guys."

Of the fight early in the second half, the Munster boss said: I don't know what happened here, there were a lot of people involved which is never nice to see and we missed the penalty, the score was 6-3 at that stage.

"Had we gone to 9-3 it might have given momentum to our side, so we missed that penalty and that's what I said earlier in the week - to come and win here, only one side has managed it (in Europe), you need to be at your utmost best and take all of your opportunities and unfortunately we left one or two opportunities out there."

Picture: INPHO/Billy Stickland

Saracens boss Mark McCall repeated his defence coach Alex Sandersons claim that Munster doctor Kearns had said something untoward to Jamie George to spark the brawl and that his club would consider taking further action.

We need to decide what we're going to do before I start speaking about that. From what I know, something pretty bad was said at Jamie (George).

"He wouldn't have reacted the way he reacted otherwise. We'll take our time to decide whether we do anything.

I don't think what was said to Jamie was good at all. We'll see. If a doctor....we just have to decide....because it started a 30-man brawl.

"Owen Farrell got penalised for running into the melee but from what I saw 29 other people ran into it.

"It was a strange penalty to give and it was instigated by a member of their staff who said something horrible to one of our players.

"We'll decide what happens next.

Read the original:
Van Graan: 'You always back the decisions on the pitch' - BreakingNews.ie