Mediaboss Marketing

Artificial intelligence (AI) is having a Kim Kardashian moment.

Dicer.ai, an AI-driven advertising performance analytics company, andFameFlow.ai, the worlds first celebrity and influencer AI likeness rights licensing platform, announced apartnershipon Wednesday (April 10) to boost the influencer marketing landscape. The move is part of a broader trend of influencers increasingly using AI.

AI can streamline what used to be a tedious influencer discovery and relationship-building process by creating instant filters, screening for influencer fraud, engagement metrics and the forecasting of campaign results based on past data,Sara Saffari, a fitness influencer with over 2 million followers onInstagram, told PYMNTS. This means campaigns that can be better targeted, evaluated and eventually run at scale.

Theinfluencer economyis growing. A2023 studyby the influencer marketing platformLTKshowed that Generation Z and millennials trust content creators more than traditional ads and celebrities.

The study also noted that people of all ages are buying more products online via creators affiliate links, particularly Gen Z and millennials, at 75% and 67%, respectively. Additionally, the findings confirmed that social media significantly influences consumer shopping behaviors.

The Dicer collaboration provides brands and digital agencies with access to celebrity and influencer endorsements, coupled with real-time data on ad performance, aiming to boost engagement and improve ad profits.

By combining Dicers analytical capabilities with FameFlows influencer reach, were offering a never-before-seen approach to digital marketing, saidMarco Bianco, CEO of Dicer, in anews release. Our joint solution not only simplifies the process of launching mega-influencer-endorsed likeness campaigns but also ensures they are optimized for peak performance.

Saffari is also the CEO ofInfluencerNexus, an agency for influencers. She said AI now allows brands and agencies to streamline influencer marketing more rapidly and without guessing the potential performance of campaign results. It also allows for forecasting key performance indicators (KPIs) throughout the campaign process.

This means a far more robust influencer economy that is less wild west, which ultimately drives far better results for influencers, Saffari said.

As a fitness influencer who posts pictures of her workouts and lifestyle, Saffari uses AI to streamline influencer campaigns for brands by sourcing, auditing and creating campaigns.

I also use it to streamline content creation across my audience, she added. Content that once took days now takes 1-2 hours maximum for 30 days of content.

Artificial intelligence can also streamline the process of integrating sponsor advertisements into popular influencer videos. By using AI, companies can more efficiently identify suitable influencers, match their content themes with relevant ads, and automate parts of the negotiation and placement process.

This technology not only simplifies the logistics but also enhances the precision of targeting audiences, ensuring that the right ads reach the most receptive viewers based on their viewing habits and preferences.

We see AI as a tool to open up a new channel for enabling influencers and creators to work with companies by embedding Attention Media elements, such as branded objects, into the videos,Cory Treffiletti, CMO ofRembrand, told PYMNTS.

Using AI, you can do so in a post-production process, allowing creators to create and monetize later. This scales more broadly than sponsored posts, and our proprietary technology enables this in a more realistic, constrained manner than you get with a horizontal approach to a generative AI model, he added.

AI is helping ad companies find influencers and predict trends. Previously, advertisers would scour TikTok or Instagram to find influencers,Logan Welbaum, founder ofPlai, an AI-powered marketing tool, told PYMNTS.

AI is also helping algorithms on social media platforms put more content towards a more relevant audience, Welbaum added. How do you get people to stay on the platform longer? Place the right content at the right place at the right time and with the help of AI, social media platforms are getting much better at this. This is helping create more influencers faster than ever.

One of the more surprising trends impacting the influencer economy is the use ofAI deepfakes that pose as influencers or become influencers in their own right. These AI-generated figures can create content, interact with followers, and endorse products like human influencers. The technology behind these deepfakes allows them to mimic human behaviors and appearances with stunning accuracy, making them almost indistinguishable from real people.

The trend raises questions about authenticity and trust in the digital influencer space, as observers say that viewers may only sometimes be aware that they are interacting with a machine. Additionally, this phenomenon could reshape the marketing landscape by allowing brands to craft perfect influencer representations tailored to their exact specifications, potentially altering how products are promoted and who is considered influential in the digital realm.

This is raising important discussions around the use of identity that all companies and marketers should follow,Abby Rose, associate director at829 Studios, a digital agency and marketing consultancy, told PYMNTS. When embracing AI and its many benefits, we all must keep in mind that the goal of these partnerships is to center authenticity and humanity. We cant let AI take us too far away from the personal appeal that makes influencers relevant to so many.

See original here:
Influencers Harness AI to Boost Fame and Fortune - PYMNTS.com

SpaceX's mega-rocket Starship is set to launch toward space this weekend, after exploding on its first try.

Starship reaching space would be a victory for Elon Musk and SpaceX that's over a decade in the making.

Here's how Starship has evolved, from the first concept to today.

SpaceX is planning to launch its Starship mega-rocket toward orbit again as soon as Saturday. Mere months ago, the ship tried to fly to space for the first time and exploded en route.

If it succeeds this time, Starship could quickly become the most powerful rocket in operation, a monumental feat over a decade in the making.

SpaceX founder and CEO Elon Musk introduced the early concepts of Starship in 2012, which back then was known as the Mars Colony Transporter.

Here's how the new launch system has evolved, from its first iteration as the Mars Colony Transporter, to the BFR ("Big Fucking Rocket"), to today's Starship-Super Heavy, in pictures.

Starship is a futuristic-looking spaceship that's designed to stack atop a towering Super Heavy booster, making the world's first fully reusable launch system.

It should be able to heave more cargo than any previous rocket to Earth's orbit, the moon, and Mars.

But first Starship has to prove it can reach orbit at all.

On its first attempt, in April, Starship failed to separate from the Super Heavy booster 24 miles above ground, ultimately tumbling, until it exploded.

However, this was just the latest in a series of multiple explosions over the years.

At an international space technology event in 2016, Musk finally revealed the long-awaited prototype design of SpaceX's biggest rocket yet.

Originally teased under the name Mars Colonial Transporter, Starship's first rocket design was called "Interplanetary Space Transporter" as SpaceX realized its ambitions went beyond transport to Mars.

"This system really gives you freedom to go anywhere you want in the solar system," Musk said at the event, per Popular Science.

The 2016 design put forward a carbon fiber hulled rocket, with expandable legs that could deploy during landing.

By 2017, the design started to look somewhat more like its final Starship form. This version was named BFR.

SpaceX's president Gwynne Shotwell eventually announced BFR stood for "Big Falcon Rocket", a nod to the company's other rocket. But it was widely reported at the time the acronym originally referred to a very different name used colloquially in-house as "Big Fucking Rocket." However, Musk has never publicly confirmed this.

More recognizable as a Starship, its landing legs were gone, replaced by the characteristic arrow-like fins sticking out of the side of the rocket though it has three fins instead of two.

The biggest difference with the final design is that in 2017, the rocket was still due to be molded out of carbon fiber. But that was soon going to change.

The first Starship prototype wasn't really a Starship at all. Dubbed "Starhopper," the stout craft was only ever meant to test the power of the Raptor engine SpaceX was developing for Starship.

The little Starhopper showed the engine's might in 2019, when it leapt 492 feet in the air and successfully landed back down.

Musk unveiled the first bonafide Starship prototype in 2019. But this design would not fare well.

The biggest leap made between the BFR concept and the Mk1 Starship was that the new prototype was made of steel, a material choice that has become the mainstay of the Starship rockets.

"The carbon fiber is $135 a kilogram," where about 35% of it is scrapped, "so you're starting to approach almost $200 a kilogram. The steel is $3 a kilogram," Musk told Popular Mechanics in 2019.

Musk then ambitiously announced the rocket would be ready to fly within two to three months.

The first Starship, though, did not last long. On the first liquid nitrogen pressure test, designed to simulate and execute the pressure during a real launch, Starship Mk1 burst apart.

The next few Starships were more successful than the first, flying miles into the air above SpaceX's facilities in Boca Chica, Texas.

The first full-fledged Starship prototype to really catch some air was called Starship serial no. 8, or SN8. It soared 7.8 miles high, then cut its engines and belly-flopped toward the ground, proving the spaceship could fly. Even so, that prototype slammed into the landing pad and exploded.

It took three more prototypes blowing up before a Starship finally stuck the landing in May 2021. That prototype was called SN15.

Musk's long-term plan is for Starship to be a reusable rocket, and for the first time, SN15 showed the spaceship could touch down back on its landing pad unscathed.

With these prototypes' successes, SpaceX was ready to move to its next step: launching the rocket atop its Super Heavy booster.

But that maiden flight wouldn't happen for another two years.

The next landmark trial for Starship was for the spaceship to take its fully integrated form stacked on top of its Super Heavy Booster.

The spaceship took off atop its booster, aiming to reach orbit for the first time, in April 2023. The rocket's fully integrated maiden flight test, however, did not end exactly as hoped.

Though the rocket successfully took off, the booster was eventually unable to separate from the spaceship, leaving the rocket to tumble out of control and eventually burst mid-air.

It later came to light that, in addition to the separation failure, SpaceX had miscalculated just how resistant its concrete launchpad would be against the dozens of Raptor engines in the booster.

Reports suggest the rocket blew a crater through the launchpad, blasting sand, concrete, and debris far afield, some of which was said to have landed in a small town 5 miles away.

Musk is undeterred and aims to fly the next iteration of his rocket shortly.

Since its last flight, SpaceX has made at least 1,000 changes to the rocket design, Musk previously told reporter Ashlee Vance, the most noticeable of which is the introduction of a vent between the spaceship and the booster.

Engineers also have devised a risky maneuver one designed to help prevent the explosive error of the last test. The Starship spaceship will fire up its own engines as its booster is still pushing it forward.

This will be the rocket's most ambitious test flight yet.

Read the original article on Business Insider

See the original post:

Photos show how SpaceX's Starship evolved from a trash-can-shaped prototype to the most powerful rocket ever built - Yahoo Movies Canada

The free anti-theft software installation is available for people who own a 2010-2021 Hyundai.

HOUSTON The Houston Police Department said the thefts of Hyundais have been on the rise for the past few years in Houston, which is why it's partnering with the motor company to install free anti-theft software for some Hyundai owners this weekend.

Specially trained mobile service technicians will be at Greenspoint Mall, located at 12300 North Freeway, from Friday, April 19 through Sunday, April 21 to install this software for 2010-2021 Hyundais owners. No appointment is necessary.

Technicians will be on-site from 8 a.m. to 6 p.m. on Friday and Saturday, and from 8 a.m. to 2 p.m. on Sunday.

Hyundai said the installation should take less than 30 minutes.

Houston police said they first saw a spike in theft of Hyundais in 2021. That's when social media posts started to circulate about how an alleged design flaw made Hyundias and Kias easier to steal.

Hyundai said as the trend grew, it began developing engine software solutions to safeguard customers.

"Our focus is on supporting our customers, but we realize this theft ring brings a lot of impact to the community and also to the police departments," said Dave VandeLinde with Hyundai.

Police said they typically see an increase in auto thefts in the spring and summer months.

"We know that vehicles are a lifeline for everyone to get to work, to attend school, to care for our families, and this crime prevention project is an opportunity for citizens to take action," said Dana Hitzman with HPD's Auto Theft Division.

Although the event is focused on Hyundai models from 2010 to 2021, any Hyundai owner can pick up a free steering wheel lock.

KHOU 11on social media:Facebook | X | Instagram | YouTube

See the original post here:
Hyundai providing free anti-theft software installation this weekend at Greenspoint Mall - KHOU.com

Ubuntu Studio remains the quickest one-shot way to get at Linux and free software for music, sound, video, media, and 3D. And they deserve some extra love now, especially since Apple Silicon has slightly deflated desktop Linux attention. Heres a look at the long-term support version that just hit beta, due later this month.

Ubuntu Studio has its own release cadence, so yes, 24.04 the April 2024 release is an LTS (long-term support) release. 24.04.1 will then come in August 2024, with full stable support.

We can dive into various Linux distros for media work another day, but the simplest way to say this is that Ubuntu Studio is the easiest answer to the following use cases:

That last one, especially.

Theres some great stuff in this release and the most recent. Here are a few highlights:

To me, just having PipeWire (the audio engine for general use) play nicely with JACK (the multi-point audio engine we rely on in performance-dependent music applications) is a godsend. See specifically their Ubuntu Studio audio configuration. Look, the truth is, you can basically get any distro with decent package management to run anything you want. Ubuntu Studio always set itself apart by figuring out how to navigate the one area that could cause issues all the audio cruft. And theyve really made headway now, to the point that they also can recommend PipeWire for professional use. (But JACK is still there for when you need to integrate music and audio tools in creative ways.)

Now, Im sure someone will have some alternative ideas for distros to run and some are better at focusing on true free software, privacy, and avoiding proprietary tools so please, Id love to hear some discussion. Ubuntu Studio just provides a good starting place, and is often a great choice when you have a box you want to get up and running as a desktop quickly. (I also like the server Ubuntu, but thats another discussion.)

These efforts are all truly community-driven you can bet that creative video and music tools are something that get really zero private support. So they deserve some love and feedback if you find bugs or can contribute.

Also, this may not be obvious, but while downloading the full Ubuntu Studio distro and running off a USB stick is the easiest way to start an installation on an Intel-based machine from scratch, you can also get the same advantages on any Ubuntu flavor or install. That means you might:

Thats covered in the installer.

See the official site: https://ubuntustudio.org/

And check the latest news, which covers a bit more on how theyre handling communications and community support changes recently. (Im sad to see them leave Matrix; thats another topic!)

Oh yeah, and speaking of things you can now run on Linux:

See some reviews:

And the release this is based on:

Read more from the original source:
Ubuntu Studio in new LTS beta; still the easiest creative Linux distro - CDM Create Digital Music - Create Digital Music

Open this photo in gallery:

Prime Minister Justin Trudeau appears as a witness at the Public Inquiry Into Foreign Interference in Federal Electoral Processes and Democratic Institutions in Ottawa, on April 3.Adrian Wyld/The Canadian Press

We are partway through the mandate of the Public Inquiry into Foreign Interference in Federal Electoral Processes and Democratic Institutions, a.k.a. the Foreign Interference Commission, which is to say we are all the way through the only part that matters.

The commission is supposed to report by May 3 two weeks from now on the first part of its mandate: to examine and assess interference by China, Russia and other foreign states in the 2019 and 2021 elections, and the flow of information to senior decision-makers, including elected officials and actions taken in response. In other words: what went wrong, who knew and what did they do about it?

The commissions final report, due by the end of the year, is supposed to assess more systemic issues surrounding how government agencies should best detect, deter and counter foreign interference. But these are not questions for which a public inquiry is the necessary, or even appropriate forum. They are the sorts of broad policy questions we elect governments, with the support of the civil service, to tackle.

The point of a public inquiry, and the formidable powers of investigation that go with it, is to delve into the sorts of things that governments would rather were not delved into: the critical failures, mistakes and omissions, including by current elected officials, that might have given rise to the situation being investigated.

That was never likely under the pseudo-inquiry conducted by special rapporteur and Trudeau family friend David Johnston, which was why it was established and why it failed. It remains to be seen how much further the current inquiry gets, given the limits placed on even its access to sensitive documents.

What can be said, however, after three weeks of hearings, is how much it has succeeded in establishing already. Recall the state of play before the inquiry.

In spite of a series of reports in The Globe and Mail and other media, drawing on scores of leaked intelligence documents and interviews with confidential intelligence sources, detailing how China, in particular, had attempted to interfere in the past two elections how it had run misinformation campaigns against certain candidates, particularly Conservatives, it considered unfriendly; how it had channelled funding to others, mostly Liberals, it considered friendly; how it had conspired to secure a nomination for at least one candidate in a safe Liberal riding, Han Dong, who went on to be elected; how it had attempted to intimidate a senior Conservative MP, Michael Chong; and how, despite the Canadian Security Intelligence Services repeated attempts to raise the alarm with senior government officials, up to and including the Prime Minister, nothing had been done about it, not even so much as informing the purported victims of the interference campaign it was still possible to pretend, if you tried very hard, that this was all a lot of fuss over nothing.

Who were these confidential sources, anyway? Were those documents accurately quoted, and in context? Besides, intelligence is not evidence: the documents could have been based, all of them, on hearsay and rumour. Maybe the leakers had political motives. Maybe there was other intelligence, not yet disclosed, that was exculpatory.

It is rather more difficult to play this sort of game now. We shall have to see, of course, what the commissioner, Justice Marie-Jose Hogue, says in her report. But nothing that has come out of the inquiry to date has materially challenged any of what was contained in the CSIS documents, or how it was reported.

Mr. Dongs appearance, in particular, did nothing to advance his case that he was an innocent victim of circumstance. There was his surprising admission, in testimony before the inquiry, that he had met with and solicited the votes of a group of Chinese foreign students who were later bused into the nomination meeting, a fact he had neglected to mention until then. He said a conversation with his wife had jogged his memory.

There was, too, his response to evidence that he had advised Chinese officials, in a conversation taped by CSIS, that an immediate release of the two Michaels would be seen as an affirmation of the effectiveness of a hardline Canadian approach as advocated by the Conservative opposition. It was not, as you might expect, I never said that, but I dont remember saying that.

Mr. Dongs memory failings perhaps explain why he has yet to be admitted back into the Liberal caucus, from which he exiled himself last year while he pursued his efforts to clear his name. But as efforts in self-incrimination they pale in comparison with the testimony of a parade of Liberal officials and cabinet ministers, including the Prime Minister.

It has always been a mystery how, in the face of this hail of memos from intelligence officials, some at the very highest levels, warning of Chinas attempts to interfere, senior Liberals, inside government and out, could have remained so oblivious or having been alerted, could have failed to act.

Their testimony before the inquiry only accentuates the implausibility of the story. At every turn, Liberal officials responses were either we didnt see the memo, or it was not reflected in oral briefings, or in the face of evidence they received both, well, what does CSIS know anyway?

The Prime Ministers chief of staff, Katie Telford, testified that on a previous occasion she had ordered that a particularly incriminating CSIS memo be rewritten, based on her own intuition that it must be mistaken. Much to her delight, the agency obliged the very next day.

Intelligence agencies can of course get things wrong. And governments are not automatically obliged to accept their assessment. But can it really be acceptable that a government official can not just disregard an intelligence memo, but order its findings adjusted to her liking, without any checks or safeguards?

More worrying still was the aftermath of CSISs briefing of party officials on the Han Dong matter. The briefing, carried out during the 2019 election campaign, was classified, restricted to a small number of officials with security clearance. Yet, as a senior national-security official told The Globe last week, a party member tipped off Mr. Dong days later that CSIS had their eye on him.

Then there was the testimony of the Prime Minister. Much attention has been paid to Justin Trudeaus peculiarly vehement insistence that he seldom reads the briefing materials put in front of him. While he reads them when he can, as a summary of Mr. Trudeaus prehearing interview put it, in other cases he trusts that someone else will tell him if there is something he needs to know. Or as he said in his public appearance, the only way to guarantee, to make sure, that I receive the necessary information is to give me an in-person briefing.

This appears to conflict with testimony offered by Ms. Telford before a parliamentary committee a year ago, that of course the Prime Minister reads any documents he receives. But it is far from the only contradiction or anomaly in his testimony.

Mr. Trudeau testified that, while he was briefed by the partys national campaign manager, Jeremy Broadhurst (now a senior adviser in the Prime Ministers Office) on the Han Dong affair, he did not feel there was sufficient or sufficiently credible information that would justify this very significant step as to remove a candidate in these circumstances. Mr. Broadhurst, for his part, testified that he recommended that no action should be taken, because I thought the bar for overturning that that bar should be extremely high.

Oh please. This very significant step? If only. Political parties drop candidates all the time, and with far less justification because they posted something untoward on their Facebook page when they were 12, let alone because they are suspected of being the protgs of a hostile foreign power. This sudden respect for the sanctity of the local nomination process would be a lot easier to credit if there were any if the races were not often rigged by party HQ to favour one candidate or another, when they are not pre-empted altogether.

Indeed, Mr. Trudeau at another point smirked at CSISs naivet about the Canadian political process: nomination meetings, he said in a prehearing interview, are stacked with busloads of supporters for one candidate or another all the time. That may be true, but they are not usually under the direction of a foreign power told, as the inquiry also heard, that their families back home would face consequences if they did not show up.

So the Liberals, and Mr. Trudeau in particular, are left with many more questions to answer after their testimony than before. Their insistence, in particular, that briefing notes prepared by CSIS for the Prime Ministers Office, stating that Beijing had clandestinely and deceptively interfered in both the 2019 and 2021 general elections, that state actors are able to conduct [foreign interference] successfully in Canada because there are no consequences, either legal or political, and that until [foreign interference] is viewed as an existential threat to Canadian democracy and governments forcefully and actively respond, these threats will persist, was not reflected in what CSIS director David Vigneault personally briefed them, hangs by the slenderest of threads.

Recalled to the witness stand, Mr. Vigneault testified he might not have used those exact words in his oral briefings, but only because he had been telling them much the same thing for years. I can say with confidence that this is something that has been conveyed to the government, to ministers, the Prime Minister, using these words and other types of words, he said.

The question is why no one was listening. Or why, if they were, they stopped up their ears.

Read the original:
Opinion: The foreign interference inquiry features a parade of senior Liberals protesting too much - The Globe and Mail