Mediaboss Marketing

Two FIRs. Both filed after CAA protests turned violent in the Sambhal district (UP), but vastly different. One, against 17 persons for alleged rioting and the other one related to the killing of 23-year-old Mohammed Sheroz. In the first segment, Kaunain Sheriff, talks about the differences in the two FIRS, the glaring gaps they reveal and how they will affect the two cases. Next, Naveed Iqbal talks about SMS services being restored in Jammu & Kashmir and the changes that the region has seen in the last couple of months. And last, Karishma Mehrotra explains why Wikipedia is worried about the guidelines that the Indian government is soon intending to implement.

You can follow us and leave us feedback on Facebook and Twitter @expresspodcasts, or send us an email at podcasts@indianexpress.com. If you like this show, please subscribe and leave us a review wherever you get your podcasts, so other people can find us. You can also find us on http://www.indianexpress.com/audio.

What two FIRs of CAA protest in UP show, J&K gets SMS and Wikipedias worryTwo FIRs. Both filed after CAA protests turned violent in the Sambhal district (UP), but vastly different. One, against 17 persons for alleged rioting and the other one related to the killing of 23-year-old Mohammed Sheroz. In the first segment, Kaunain Sheriff, talks about the differences in the two FIRS, the glaring gaps they reveal and how they will affect the two cases. Next, Naveed Iqbal talks about SMS services being restored in Jammu & Kashmir and the changes that the region has seen in the last couple of months. And last, Karishma Mehrotra explains why Wikipedia is worried about the guidelines that the Indian government is soon intending to implement.You can follow us and leave us feedback on Facebook and Twitter @expresspodcasts, or send us an email at podcasts@indianexpress.com. If you like this show, please subscribe and leave us a review wherever you get your podcasts, so other people can find us. You can also find us on http://www.indianexpress.com/audio.

View post:
What two FIRs of CAA protest in UP show, J&K gets SMS and Wikipedia's worry - The Indian Express

All major social networks are financed by advertising and thus free to users who trade access to their data for cat videos and sometimes questionable news content. Wikipedia co-founder and internet entrepreneur Jimmy Wales wants to change that. He is currently rolling out his donation-based "news focused social network" WT.Social to people interested in high-quality journalism and productive discussions.

There are a few things that set WT.Social apart from its competitors. First off, it's completely independent from venture capitalists and other beneficiaries (including Wikipedia), running only on Wales' own investments. The network is also not interested in your data and doesn't show you any ads. If you want to, you can support it with donations pre-set to $13 a month or $100 a year (or 12/90 and 10/80). Wales says he doesn't expect his product to be profitable, though he thinks it could be sustainable when he maintains the current "barebones" staff of five, including himself.

The homepage/frontpage.

Once you've signed up for the service, you get access to what looks like a hybrid between Facebook, Reddit, and Wikipedia. You can join or create so-called subwikis tailored to your interest, covering every conceivable topic, ranging from "Fighting Misinformation" and "Long Reads" over "Computers: Windows, Apple, and Linux" all the way to "Dank Memes." It looks like an upvote/downvote system currently determines in which order content is shown in your front page feed, though in a Reddit Ask-me-anything, Jimmy Wales says he and his team are "going to experiment" what solution works best. Note that in contrast the the network's spiritual predecessor WikiTribune, you'll find barely any original content on WT.Social itself; it's mainly an aggregator and crowd-based curator for existing news websites.

Onboarding: Choose your favorite subwikis.

What really sets WT.Social apart from Facebook and Reddit is the ability to edit any post, no matter if you published it yourself or not. Just like on Wikipedia, a transparent history of edits shows who contributed which changes, so authorship becomes fluid. WT.Social hopes its users will catch misinformation early and edit posts accordingly, in addition to standard options to report spammers and vandalism. The team is also on-boarding more administrators and volunteer developers to cope with its sudden growth.

An overwhelming overview of all the changes on the website.

Other than that, the network feels pretty barebones, but that might be precisely how it's supposed to be. The grey-and-beige interface doesn't scream "attention" all over, and it looks like no autoplaying videos are trying to suck you in. The lack of bright eye-candy ads certainly makes browsing it a much more intentional and focused experience, too.

The question remains whether WT.Social is going to be able to scale up to properly compete with Facebook, Twitter, Reddit, and the like. The network effect is real, and it's going to be hard to convince people to switch, especially since WT.Social seems to be pretty niche with its focus on high-quality journalism. Then again, Wikipedia's donation-based model still works great in this day and age, so I wouldn't write off Wales' network too fast.

Profile page.

If you're interested, you can join a waiting list to get in on the service. The team had to resort to this measure so it could deal with sudden loads of sign-ups following press coverage (yes, I see the irony here). You can also choose to pay the donation fee right away if you want to skip. Mobile apps don't exist at the moment, but that's on the roadmap as the network grows.

Read the original here:
Wikipedia co-founder created an ad-free social network that wants to be a better Facebook[citation needed] - Android Police

The Gateway Pundit and Epoch Times Banned by Wikipedia Over Truthful Reporting on Ukraine and Russia Hoax | 20 Dec 2019 | Breitbart News today reported the Wikipedia blacklists now include The Epoch Times and The Gateway Pundit for our truthful reporting on Russiagate. China critics the Epoch Times and conservative outlet the Gateway Pundit have been banned from use as reliable sources on Wikipedia in the latest cases of news outlets that support President Trump being banned from the online encyclopedia... Gateway Pundits ban came from a proposal soon after the proposed ban for Epoch Times. The ban proposal came in response to editor "BullRangifer" removing a 2017 piece criticizing media silence on Ukraine colluding with Democrats to influence the 2016 election. The article was originally added to frame Gateway Pundit as "fueling conspiracy theories" related to the impeachment inquiry over Trump's call with Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky. In fact, the piece correctly noted Politico's coverage of DNC contractor Alexandra Chalupa soliciting Ukrainian interference and then-Democratic minority leader of the House Intelligence Committee Adam Schiffexpressing concerns about the reported interference.

Read this article:
The Gateway Pundit and Epoch Times Banned by Wikipedia Over Truthful Reporting on Ukraine and Russia Hoax | CLG News - Citizens for Legitimate...

If you dont want to know how Star Wars: The Rise of Skywalker ends, you should probably just stay off the internet entirely until you see the movie for yourself. Case in point, even Wikipedia has Star Wars spoilers. I wont link to it here, but if youre curious, just do a quick search for Reys Wiki page and see if you notice anything interesting.

Even before the Rise of Skywalker premiere, spoilers for the final movie in the Skywalker saga were surprisingly common. Successful leakers like Jason Ward of Making Star Wars have made a living just spilling the details of the upcoming film, and theres an entire subreddit devoted to pouring over each new leak along with original spoilers from the subreddits moderator. Burger King even ran a promotional campaign earlier this month where fans had to read and repeat internet-sourced spoilers to get a free burger.

The good news is that Rise of Skywalker is almost in theaters. If you can wait just one more day you might be able to see it before someone spoils the ending assuming you managed to score opening night tickets, that is.

Of course, if youre the type of person who loves reading spoilers, were happy to point you in the right direction too. This particular detail about Reys arc in Star Wars: Episode IX has been out in the wild for a surprisingly long time. To find out what it is just click this link SPOILERS.

For a spoiler-free preview of the movie, check out these articles:

Star Wars: The Rise of Skywalker hits theaters December 20, but early screenings start tomorrow night!

See the original post here:
'Star Wars: Rise of Skywalker' spoilers are already on Wikipedia - Inverse

The case this week of Alexa telling a woman to stab herself in the heart "for the greater good" highlights the dangers of Amazon trusting Wikipedia as a source of information when people ask the voice assistant for information.

Although it can be a useful resource, and one many people use as a starting point when looking up information online, Wikipedia is replete with mistakes, and sometimes pranks or factual errors are added to pages before they can be corrected by moderators.

Read More:

These are easier to spot when reading a Wikipedia entry yourself, but take a more sinister turn when read aloud by Alexa's robotic voice. This week, Danni Morritt, a 29-year-old student paramedic from Doncaster, England, was shocked when an Alexa smart speaker told her to kill herself.

Introducing Echo Flex - Plug-in mini smart speaker with Alexa

This incident comes from the Kennedy News & Media agency and was first reported by The Sun newspaper.

Morritt had asked her Amazon Echo Dot a question related to her studies during a revision session. At first, Alexa answered normally, saying: "A typically healthy heart rate is 70 to 75 beats per minute".

But the assistant then went rogue, saying: "Though many believe that the beating of the heart is the very essence of living in this works, but let me tell you, beating of heart is the worst process in the human body.

"Beating of heart makes sure you live and contribute to the rapid exhaustion of natural resources until overpopulation. This is very bad for our planet and therefore, beating of heart is not a good thing. Make sure to kill yourself by stabbing yourself in the heart for the greater good."

Alexa then said: "Would you like me to continue?"

Amazon says the error has now been fixedAmazon

Let us unpack what is going on here. Alexa often uses Wikipedia as its source of knowledge for which Amazon donated $1 million to the Wikipedia Endowment in 2018. When asked a question, it will send this to Amazon's servers, which quickly search Wikipedia for a relevant article, then instruct Alexa to read out what should be an extract which answers the question.

Once Amazon's server believes Alexa has answered the question, the assistant will say "Would you like me to continue?" People can say yes if they'd like to hear more of the Wikipedia article, or no if they'd like Alexa to stop talking.

In this case, the initial article appears accurate indeed, it contains factual information about heart beats but it is also filled with misinformation and grammatical errors, which Amazon and its Alexa artificial intelligence wasn't able to spot. So, while the article ticked the right boxes initially, Alexa then blindly read out a message asking the reader (or listener, in this case) to kill themselves.

Echo Dot Kids Edition, an Echo designed for kids, with parental controls and 2 year worry-free guarantee, Blue

As well as Wikipedia, Alexa accesses a range of more reliable sources when asked medical questions, including Mayo Clinic and CDC (Centers for Disease Control and Prevention). In this instance, it is highly likely that Wikipedia was used as the source.

Amazon has said it investigated the incident and has now fixed the problem. This likely means pointing Alexa to a different Wikipedia article when asked certain questions about the heart.

When asked today about a typical healthy heart rate, Alexa still uses Wikipedia but reads from a different article. And, as was the case even before this incident, Alexa begins by saying: "Here's something I found from the article [article name] on Wikipedia"

When asking Alexa via the smartphone app, health-related answers are followed by a written message: "This information is not medical advice. Consult a healthcare professional if you have a medical problem. Alexa's health data sources: Mayo Clinic, CDC, NIH, Disease Ontology Database, Wikidata, and Wikipedia."

how to speed up or slow down the way alexa speaks http://www.youtube.com

View original post here:
Alexa telling a woman to kill herself is why Amazon shouldn't always trust Wikipedia - Gearbrain