Mediaboss Marketing

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

Another week, another unit of a dollar-pegged stablecoin. This week in crypto, a Russian power grid company makes use of the blockchain to keep the lights on; 70 percent of Matic Networks market cap was wiped; BlockFi gets a new license in Washington State; and the Lightning Network Wikipedia page is up for deletion.

A Russian power grid company is piloting a blockchain system that would automate the metering of electricity. The pilot currently serves 400 homes in the Kaliningrad and Sverdlovsk regions, but the program is due to expand to around 5.3 million early next year. If that trial is successful, the system will be dished out to all of Russia.

The pilot, by Russian power grid company Rosseti, blockchain company Waves Enterprises, and the Russian banking giant, Alfa Bank, would help households keep tabs on how much electricity they use. The system links up to an app that energy consumers can use to work out how much they have to pay, as well as receive advice on their electricity habits that could save them money in the long run.

Washington State licensed the New York-based loan service, BlockFito offer its services to customers. Specifically, the license will enable BlockFi customers to trade and transfer cryptocurrencies to their interest-bearing accounts.

Why might anyone care, outside of BlockFis teensy tiny bubble? BlockFi just became the first company to offer crypto interest-bearing accounts to customers in the stateno mean feat: The States requirements are among the hardest in the U.S. (Exchanges Kraken and Shapeshift used to operate in Washington State, but quit due to the regulations, which Shapeshift has described as unethical, wasteful, and reckless. Until now, only crypto exchange Coinbase has been licensed to do business there.

BlockFi had to wade through extensive audits to make sure it was up to the job. David Spack, BlockFis chief compliance officer, told Decrypt the journey was arduous and took several months. Well done, Spack!

It was a horrible week for the Matic Network, which saw $56 millionor 70 percent of its market capwiped out. That destroyed virtually all of the gains it enjoyed since the 190 percent boost in price earlier this month.

What we believe is that after our meteoric rise, these people (market manipulators) thought that [MATIC] would be an ideal project to short, Sandeep Nailwal, Matics co-founder and COO, said in a question and answer session with the community.

I think the timing of this manipulative shorting was chosen in a way that our whole team was asleep because it was night time in India. It seems to be a coordinated attack, he said.

Be the first to get Decrypt Members. A new type of account built on blockchain.

Some believed that the MATIC team were to blame for the dump, but Nailwal said, Binance bared the highest (trade) volume. Binance also said there is no involvement of the Matic team here. Even we were caught unaware.

Binances CEO, Changpeng Zhao, confirmed Nailwals claim: Our team is still investigating the data, but it's already clear that the MATIC team has nothing to do with it. A number of big traders panicked, causing a cycle, he tweeted.

Whats MATIC going to do about it? What can it do about it? It certainly wont be burning any MATIC tokens to reduce the circulating supply, or implementing a buyback program to boost its value.

This is not something to be scared about in the long term, it's just that in the short term it may have hurt a lot of people in the community, said Nailwal. Our primary objective has been to protect the community and [provide] the best information where they can make their own decisions.

U.S. prosecutors in New Jersey charged three men with fraud in connection with BitClub Network, a mining investment group that they say bilked victims of $722 million.

Like other such enterprises, BitClub, which launched in 2014, would ask punters for cash to buy mining rigs that would generate bitcoin. Investors would then share in the returns, which, surprise surprise, never materializedbut BitClub fabricated the profit margins to encourage more people to invest.

The feds say that the principals in the scam talked smack about their victims behind their backs, referring to them as sheep and boasting that they were building this whole model on the backs of idiots.

The defendants face 20 years in prison and a fine of up to $250,000 if convicted.

The Wikipedia page for the Bitcoin Lightning Networkthe network that handles bitcoin transactions without first verifying them on the blockchainis up for consideration for deletion.

Among other things, proponents of its deletion argue that the cites to back up claims of the Bitcoin Lightning network are bunk.

The Lightning Network article at the moment is pretty badly referenced, and it's not intrinsically unreasonable to look at it and go more crypto spam, and nominate it for deletion, Wikipedia moderator David Gerard, whos argued for the deletion of page, and authored Attack of the 50 foot blockchain, told Decrypt.

But Michepman, the moniker of another Wikipedia moderator, disagreed with the Delete contingent, saying their arguments are inappropriately focused on whether Bitcoin or cryptocurrency is a good idea or whether the article in its current state is good.Gerard told Decrypt that the debacle will be resolved through words and arguments, not votes. Join the fray yourself: anyoneeven Gerardcan take part.

See the original post:
This week in crypto: Russia, BlockFi, Matic, and...Wikipedia - Decrypt

WHAT DOES China want from the world? Some things are obvious: natural resources, foreign markets and nifty stuff, from high-end computer chips to top-notch airliners, that China cannot yet make. Then there is Chinas ambition, at once reasonable and terrifying, to become so strong that no other power will thwart its core demands. China has less obvious wishes, too. A surprisingly pressing one is a demand for foreign powers to recognise the legitimacy of its Communist Party. Though it may baffle outsiders, when Chinese grandees meet foreign visitors the question of legitimacy comes up, time and again. The words vary, but their meaning is something like: will America and the self-righteously democratic West ever accept that the party provides the best and most fitting government for China, with a mandate strengthened by the countrys rising global stature, economic growth and domestic stability? Chinese diplomats voice the same grievance whenever they hear international criticism. China, they protest, is being singled out for suspicion because it has a different political system, led by a communist party.

If this seems an obscure fight to pick, history teaches the world to beware. A well-connected Chinese scholar who lives and teaches in Europe, Xiang Lanxin, has written a book ascribing centuries of East-West tensions, including several crises in relations, to Westerners who condescendingly dismiss Chinas rulers, whether imperial or communist, as oriental despots. He says they have failed to grasp how Chinese leaders must earn their right to rule through deeds and accomplishments, at the risk of overthrow if they are truly tyrannical. Mr Xiang is no apologist for todays party leaders. Though an avowed Chinese patriot, he is scathing about the corruption enabled by one-party rule. He believes that modern-day income inequalities make a nonsense of claims by party bosses to be reviving traditional, Confucian ethics. In a vivid passage, he compares Beijings political scene to the last days of the Russian tsars, with charlatans and sycophants running amuck. Still, his book, The Quest for Legitimacy in Chinese Politics, A New Interpretation, is an invaluable guide to the feelings of hurt and injustice that consume those same ruling classes now.

Upgrade your inbox and get our Daily Dispatch and Editor's Picks.

A political scientist and historian at the Graduate Institute of International and Development Studies in Geneva, Mr Xiang devotes many pages to a crisis three centuries ago. Then the consensus view of China changed among European elites, just as dramatically as it is changing now in Washington and other Western capitals. The cause was an arcane theological dispute known as the Chinese rites controversy. To simplify, this was an argument about whether Chinese converts could be good Christians if they continued to pay solemn respects to their ancestors and to Confucius, a sage particularly revered by scholars and officials. Mr Xiang praises Jesuit missionaries who travelled to China in the 16th and 17th centuries, painstakingly learning Chinese and studying Confucian classics in a spirit of cultural accommodation.

Those Jesuit scientist-adventurers reported to Rome that China was a brilliant civilisation whose traditions of ancestor worship and Confucian ethics were not pagan religious rites, but customs compatible with Christian monotheism. With disastrous results for those envoys, hawks back in Europe disagreed. Mr Xiang draws explicit parallels between religious hardliners back in Europe who attacked those Jesuits for being overly tolerant of Chinese traditions, and modern-day critics who chide China for falling short of values that the West calls universal. In 1692 the Kangxi emperor was so impressed by his Jesuit guests that he issued an edict of toleration, blessing the presence of Christian Europeans in his empire. But within half a century Christianity had been banned and most missionaries expelled. The rupture was provoked by papal rulings that ancestor worship and Confucian rites were pagan idolatry. It was an unanswerable charge: the crime of Confucius-revering Chinese converts was to be un-Christian, as defined by the church in Rome. Mr Xiang argues that those taxing China with being undemocratic are using a similar trick: defining legitimacy in a way that makes it unattainable by rulers who are not Western-style democrats.

That does not make Mr Xiang or grumbling Communist Party officials correct, though. They urge the world to judge Chinas rulers by their achievements, not their political system. But that is exactly what most foreign governments do, to a fault. Even in the immediate aftermath of the murderous suppression of pro-democracy protests in 1989, Americas then-president, George H.W. Bush, secretly wrote to assure Chinas leader, Deng Xiaoping, that his aim was to preserve close ties, adding: I am respectful of the differences in our two societies and in our two systems. If Western leaders were really unable to abide communists, America and its allies would not be investing in and even helping to arm Vietnam, as a strategic partner in Asia.

Today, it is true, hawks in Washington charge previous American governments with wishing away Chinas authoritarianism and resistance to change. To quote the secretary of state, Mike Pompeo: We accommodated and encouraged Chinas rise for decades, even when that rise was at the expense of American values, Western democracy, security and good common sense. But his boss, President Donald Trump, does not deem Chinas rulers illegitimate. He says he does not blame them for taking advantage of Americas past stupidity and calls President Xi Jinping an incredible guy.

Chinese demands for respect are in part a ploy, a passive-aggressive bid to browbeat foreign critics into silence. But to meet officials in Beijing is to hear a regime talking itself into a funk about how America and its allies cannot bear to let a system like theirs succeed. That is mostly bogus. The problem is Chinas actions, not the fact that it has a politburo. But the risks of a rupture are real.

Follow this link:
Communism is not what worries the world about Chinas Communist Party - The Economist

This week marks 30 years since Romania ousted communist dictator Nicolae Ceauescu in a revolution that ended decades of communist rule in the country.

The dictator and his wife were killed by a firing squad on December 25, 1989, after days of a bloody national uprising.

A 2006 presidential commission report by anti-communist political scientist Vladimir Tismneanu called the former system "inhuman".

"The Communist regime in Romania, a totalitarian system from its establishment until its collapse, was one based on the constant violation of human rights, on the supremacy of a hostile ideology to open society, on the monopoly of power exercised by a small group of individuals, on repression, intimidation and corruption," the report concluded.

The same month, President Traian Bsescu condemned Romania's communist regime, in a symbolic separation of the state from its past.

But how much has Romania separated from its past? And what is the legacy of Romania's communist regime? Euronews spoke with experts to find out.

"The communist legacy in the broader term is still there and is definitely going to be there for a while," said George Jiglu, a political scientist at Babe-Bolyai University in Cluj-Napoca, Romania.

"In the entire region, we have issues that are visible when it comes for instance to relations between citizens and the state and how citizens perceive the state."

This is shown in opinion polls, Jiglu said, which consistently show that citizens have little trust in government.

A May 2019 Romanian survey found that 76.4% of Romanians think the country is heading in the wrong direction.

Romanians have low trust in government institutions: just 8.9% have confidence in political parties and just 9.8% have confidence in Parliament. The most trusted internal institutions, the INSCOP survey found, were the army and the church.

It's concerning that "the two key pillars of any representative democracy which are the parties and parliament have such low levels of trust", Jiglu said, though this is not limited to Romania.

It's this distrust, he added, that "actually fuels populism".

Policy analyst Sorin Ionita from Expert Forum in Bucharest agrees but pointed out that Romanians also have more trust in EU institutions.

"People in ex-communist countries appear consistently in surveys as more cynical and least trustful in their national institutions (with the exception of the army and the church)," Ionita said.

"By contrast, they show more trust in EU institutions," he said which can be attributed to an "aspiration" for good governance.

Romania also has a high rate of emigration Romanians moving abroad compared to other countries.

A recent OECD report found that 17% of the population moved abroad in 2015 and 2016. Romania had a higher emigration rate than Mexico, China and India.

This migration is due to a legacy "political culture" in which the state still does not recognise that it "provides a service" to the people, Jiglu said.

There is a lasting legacy from the previous regime, Ionita says, but it's not "communism" as one might think.

"There are legacies of the real regime of Nicolae Ceauescu, a typical Balkan combination of nationalism, primitive socialism and territorial family clans, in which everything was negotiable, informal arrangements prevailed and no official institution or planning process worked properly," said Ionita.

But in terms of the current government, no one is going to nationalise property.

Rather under successive social democratic governments, the country has rolled back anti-corruption measures. Ionita says the Social Democratic Party (PSD) is not communist, but rather conservative, closer to populists.

But Romania's government recently switched hands after a vote of no confidence in October toppled the existing social democratic government.

The change came following anti-government protests in 2018 and the imprisonment of former party leader Liviu Dragnea who went to jail in May over corruption charges.

The re-elected liberal president Klaus Iohannis has promised to tackle corruption in the country and has a new prime minister from the same party.

Iohannis has also spoken out about holding people accountable for the communist regime as well as understanding what happened in the revolution - which remains a concern in the country.

"The expectation is to have people accountable for what happened during the revolution," said Jiglu, but that will not change the legacy which he says extends to the education sector and the healthcare system in subtle ways.

Only long term changes will shift the political culture of society, he added.

What do you think? Let us know in the comments below.

Read more from the original source:
Thirty years on, what is the legacy of communism in Romania? - Euronews