Tag Archives: decision

The Turning Point: My Decision to Reduce Screen Time – A Regretful Choice

Posted on by
Reply

I
unlocked my iPhone just as my weekly screen time notifications popped up—an accidental dismissal before I could take a screenshot—and a wave of frustration washed over me. After dedicating an exhausting week to minimizing my phone usage, aiming to reduce my daily screen time from over four hours to under one, I hoped to enhance my mental wellbeing (and maybe even launch a career as an inspirational speaker). Yet, my efforts felt futile as I couldn’t post any proof online showcasing my offline status. I even contemplated using Photoshop to fabricate a screen time report and scoured Google for a way to retrieve notifications (to no avail).

Over the last decade or so, I’ve tried various self-improvement approaches. I’ve read 105 books in a year, unintentionally eliminated sugar (even from fruit) for a spell, and dabbled in shamanism, including interpretive dance. While I might suggest mastering cooking, driving, and typing with all fingers, I can’t seem to reach myself since I’ve stopped staring at my phone.




Exchange one obsession for another… Joe Stone of Tenerife.
Photo: Courtesy of Joe Stone

“Project Screen Time” was born after I listened to a podcast where comedians recommended avoiding social media for two hours after waking. Absorbing this advice—albeit from an amateur who couldn’t quite trace its origin—I decided to avoid checking Instagram first thing in the morning… and it worked. Surprisingly, steering clear of a barrage of other people’s abs before I’d fully woken up actually lifted my spirits. Even more impressively, I found I could usually hold off until after lunch if I didn’t see anything I felt compelled to react to. This brief moment of clarity quickly morphed into a whirlwind, typical of my approach to new challenges.

I swapped one fixation (constantly checking my phone) for another (intentionally not doing so). In the second week, my screen time plummeted to two hours a day. By the third week, it was down to one-and-a-half hours, and I decided to aim for under 60 minutes. A part of me was impressed that this newfound ability was working well and I appeared to be normal. However, I couldn’t keep this “gift” to myself, gradually boring my friends, acquaintances, and even service workers with tales of my newfound discipline.

Eventually, my quest took on new disruptions. I resented having to pull up maps on my phone, and while cycling, I often found myself lost. Want to show someone a photo or meme? Sorry, you’ll have to Google it on their device instead. I even hesitated to order an Uber after a night out, enduring the agony of watching the app slowly crawl toward my location while my screen time ticked away.


My frustration amplified when my screen time statistics didn’t reflect my efforts. I barely glanced at my phone by 2 PM, yet the data indicated I had used it for 36 minutes. Conspiratorial thoughts began to surface. My screen time report was divided into blue (social), turquoise (entertainment), and orange (productivity and finance). Yet, the majority of my time appeared as a prominent gray. What on earth could that gray signify?!

Eventually, “screen time” was added to my list of taboo topics (along with Taylor Swift’s music and lore, and my interest in Ron DeSantis) that were off-limits at home. My lowest moment occurred while sharing my weekly statistics with a friend. He inquired why “Settings” was my third most-used app. That was simply where I went to check my screen time.

My meltdown over not being able to celebrate my record low screen time (51 minutes a day!) served as a wake-up call. What started as a quest to reduce screen time morphed into a new phone addiction. Instead of escaping the urge to seek validation online, I found an alternate way to gain approval. Nevertheless, all was not lost. This realization nudged me toward the acceptance that I would likely never be a moderate person. I can’t rely on self-regulation (my latest regime—skin care—involves LED masks that automatically shut off after 10 minutes; I fear wearing them in the office could evoke comparisons to a vibrant Hannibal Lecter).

Ultimately, I gave up trying to recapture the elusive Screen Time Report. Instead, I resolved to share fewer aesthetic charts from settings that I could post online. Almost instantly, my DMs exploded with queries about how I managed to refrain from scrolling. I responded to every single one, and a rush of dopamine flooded my reward centers. That day, my screen time was recorded at 3 hours and 36 minutes.

Do you have any thoughts on the issues raised in this article? If you wish to send a response of up to 300 words for consideration in our Letters section, please click here.

Source: www.theguardian.com

Uber Challenges UK Supreme Court Decision on Taxes Affecting Private Employment Competitors

Posted on by
Reply

Taxi operators competing with Uber are now exempt from paying 20% VAT on their earnings outside London, following a ruling from the UK Supreme Court in a long-running case.

The court determined that the private employer would not establish a contract with passengers, thereby rejecting Uber’s appeal. This decision was celebrated by the private employer as a “sector victory” after three years of legal challenges.

Uber initiated legal action after a 2021 Supreme Court ruling declared that the driver was classified as a worker.

The company sought a declaration asserting that a privately employed taxi operator had entered into a contract with passengers, a claim supported by the London High Court in 2023.

Initially, that decision required operators to pay a 20% VAT, but the Court of Appeals overturned this after Delta Taxi and Veezu challenged it last July.

Uber brought the issue to the Supreme Court, which unanimously dismissed the case involving the US company on Tuesday.

Nia Cooper, Chief Legal Officer at Veezu, remarked: “This ruling is a triumph for the UK’s private employment sector. The unanimous decision concludes a three-year legal struggle and affirms that operators can select the business models they wish to adopt.”

She added that the outcome would shield passengers from potential fare hikes and lessen the pressure on licensing authorities. “Uber aimed for a declaration that a 20% VAT would be imposed on all PHV fares,” she stated.

“This ruling also illustrates that UK-based companies can stand firm against global conglomerates that attempt to sway the sector through litigation to suit their business frameworks.”

An Uber representative replied, “The Supreme Court’s ruling confirms that different contractual protections apply to individuals booking rides in London compared to the rest of England and Wales. This ruling does not affect Uber’s VAT, which has been upheld in two previous court decisions.”

In a related matter this year, Estonian mobility and delivery startup Volt successfully contested a claim by the UK tax authorities, HMRC, regarding a 20% VAT obligation.

HMRC has since been granted permission by the Court of Appeal to appeal a ruling stating that Bolt is only accountable for VAT on the margin, not on the full fare of the trip.

Source: www.theguardian.com

Trump Faces Backlash Over AI Decision Amid US Copyright Changes

Posted on by
Reply

hGreetings from Ello and TechScape! Radio stations and television presenters can enhance their writing by considering their delivery methods. I’m your host, Blake Montgomery. In today’s Tech News: Discussions arise regarding labor automation within the US healthcare sector, as conflicts escalate with the use of drones in India and Pakistan, both of which are armed with nuclear weapons. But first, let’s explore the evolving battle over AI and copyright in the UK and the US.

“Daring and Unprecedented Power Shift”

The UK is embroiled in intense discussions about compensating artists for using their copyrighted works in developing generative AI technologies. The Senate convened on Monday to determine whether tech companies are utilizing copyrighted materials without permission.

Insights from my colleagues Dan Millmo and Rafael Boyd:

The UK government faces challenges in the House of Representatives over its attempt to let AI firms use copyrighted works without consent.

Despite government objections, an amendment to the data bill urging AI companies to disclose which copyrighted content is being utilized received support from peers.

While this proposal is under consultation in the current year’s report, critics are leveraging the data bill to voice their disapproval.

The government’s primary proposal would permit AI companies to use copyrighted works without obtaining permissions, a stance critics denounce as impractical unless copyright holders explicitly indicate their non-usage.

Read the complete article on Monday’s vote here.

Conversely, in the US, discussions have taken a more chaotic turn. Over the weekend, Donald Trump dismissed the US Copyright Director. CBS News reported this incident. Shira Perlmutter was let go after publishing a report questioning the growing demands for AI firms to bypass existing copyright laws.

New York Democratic leader Joe Morell specifically pointed to Trump’s ally, Elon Musk, as a driving force behind this dismissal. She declined to rubber stamp Musk’s initiatives to exploit copyrighted works for training AI models.

The abrupt termination of Trump’s copyright chief brings to mind the tale of the Gordian knot. Legend has it that Alexander the Great encountered a complex knot tying a cart to a pole. Numerous attempts to untie it failed, but Alexander, with a simple sword stroke, solved the dilemma. The narrative illustrates how innovative thinking can lead to triumph. Alexander dismantled the dilemma, leaving the original problem unresolved. Perhaps the true lesson lies beyond just securing the cart, but that’s a topic for another time.

While Trump may have circumvented the challenging legal issues presented by the Copyright Office, the vacuum at the top means that influential players will likely exploit copyright regulations to their advantage. This may align with the president’s intentions. Well-capitalized AI firms appear poised to dominate copyright litigation, while they simultaneously advocate for fair compensation for artists’ creativity. Their alliance with Trump signals a shift towards a more favorable regulatory climate, as illustrated by the recent dismissal of the copyright chief. Numerous lawsuits bear witness to AI companies quietly leveraging copyrighted materials without proper permissions, prompting actions from both plaintiffs and defendants.

Trump Offers Blockchain Access

Donald Trump at the White House in Washington, DC on Monday. Photo: Nathan Howard/Reuters

My colleague, Nick Robbins, covers the contest where Trump promises to engage directly with his cryptocurrency investors.

On Monday, the top 220 investors in Donald Trump-backed cryptocurrency were granted exclusive dinner invitations with the president as a reward for their financial contributions. This culminated months of promotions, raising concerns that he is leveraging his political power to benefit his family’s business while exposing himself to foreign interests.

The cryptocurrency, dubbed $Trump, launched in mid-January and has garnered a market cap exceeding $2 billion following significant investor interest. Most of the tokens are held by companies associated with Trump’s family. As reported by Reuters.

“Congratulations! If you’re among the top 220, expect communication within the next 24 hours. Please check your inbox (including spam folders) for your invitation to dine with President Trump,” his website stated on Monday. “We look forward to seeing you at the gala dinner in Washington, DC on May 22nd.”

Democrats, ethics watchdogs, and the SEC have expressed concerns regarding Trump’s crypto ventures, highlighting corruption allegations. The dinner contest raises ethical issues, equating the opportunity for direct access to the president with a bidding war.

Drones Surge along the India-Pakistan Border

Residents inspect damaged homes in Pakistan-controlled Neelam valley in Kashmir on Monday. Photo: Muzammil Ahmed/AFP/Getty Images

Though India and Pakistan have achieved a fragile ceasefire, the recent four-day conflict between these rivals exemplifies an escalating trend.

Skip past newsletter promotions

New York Times reports that Pakistan has claimed India is deploying Turkish-made drones for assaults. India, on the other hand, alleged Pakistan mobilized 300-400 drones for attacks on 36 sites on the night of May 8th, stating they shot down approximately 70 drones launched from India.

The term “drone” encompasses two distinct concepts: small quadcopters operated remotely and larger semi-autonomous vehicles managed from military command centers. Unfortunately, this English vernacular misses the mark. For countries like India, Pakistan, and Ukraine, smaller unmanned aircraft have become significant weaponry.

The Ukraine-Russia conflict underscores the rapid expansion of drone usage. The explosive quadcopter, featuring first-person viewing, wreaked havoc during landmark assaults, including attacks on the Kremlin in May 2023.

Can Automation Solve the US Healthcare Worker Shortage?

Nurses operating a new automated dose assembly machine in Columbus, Ohio. Photo: Doral Chenoweth/The Columbus Dispatch by USA Today Network

One of the major concerns of our era is the potential for machines to largely replace human labor. Recently, the Guardian covered Zing, a robot designed to distribute methadone, a medication for opioid addiction that has surged in the US over the years. This story raises critical questions: Where should we draw the line between automation that genuinely assists workers and a profit-driven preference for robotic over human labor?

Click here for all stories on robotic medication delivery.

Walgreens has announced an expansion of its Microfilling Center services, incorporating robots for prescription dispensing and a hub dedicated to packaging chronic illness medications. As reported by CNBC, these automated centers process around 16 million prescriptions monthly, accounting for 40% of Walgreens’ prescriptions. The company aims to increase the number of locations utilizing these centers to 5,000 by year-end, up from 4,800 in February. Walgreens asserts that the shift to automation initiated in 2021 has already saved them $500 million over four years.

Pharmacy technicians are grappling with issues similar to those faced by nurses distributing methadone (including low wages, high pressure, and turnover), yet on a much larger scale. Walgreens operates approximately 12,500 stores across the US, Europe, and Latin America, with a valuation near $9.7 billion and a workforce of 312,000.

In 2023, Walgreens pharmacy staff staged strikes nationwide to protest working conditions. The central issues included chronic staffing shortages and burnout among those who remained. They branded the protest “Pharmaheadon.”

Although Walgreens may reduce pharmacy job openings due to automation and outsourcing functions to microfilling centers, it’s likely that many of these positions were not filled to begin with, creating hazardous working environments. Automation could help address the workforce shortages, mirroring potential developments in methadone clinics nationwide.

Walgreens Corporate claims that automation is easing worker challenges, allowing personnel more opportunities for personal interaction with patients. Reportedly, there’s been a 40% rise in vaccine distributions facilitated by automated prescription systems.

Learn more about labor automation in another sector here.

Broader Technology Landscape

Source: www.theguardian.com

OpenAI Reverses Decision to Eliminate Controls for Nonprofits

Posted on by
Reply

Sure! Here’s a rewritten version of the content while keeping the HTML tags intact:

On Monday, OpenAI announced its transition into a public benefits company, enabling the nonprofit overseer of OpenAI to retain significant influence over the organization.

The nonprofit will stand as OpenAI’s primary shareholder.

OpenAI’s CEO Sam Altman, along with several other Silicon Valley figures, co-founded various organizations in late 2015, including Elon Musk. In 2018, following Musk’s departure from internal disputes, Altman associated OpenAI with a commercial entity to secure the funding necessary for advancing AI technologies.

Nevertheless, the nonprofit leadership was aware that the unconventional model could be seen as a hindrance to the company’s progress. Last year, Altman and his team initiated plans to shift authority from the nonprofit to OpenAI’s investors.

However, the organization’s intentions were thwarted, and the nonprofit continues to maintain control. This outcome was seen as a win for OpenAI’s critics, including Musk, who accused the company of prioritizing profits over its initial commitment to developing a safe AI system.

Public benefit corporations are frequently characterized as entities created to generate public and social value, allowing outside investors to engage similarly to traditional investments.

At a press conference, Altman expressed satisfaction with the nonprofit’s decision to uphold control, stating that the new structure “provides us with a clearer framework to fulfill our company’s aspirations.”

OpenAI mentioned it is still in discussions regarding the nonprofit’s equity in the new organization, with the nonprofit responsible for appointing board members for the new company.

Recently, the Japanese conglomerate SoftBank spearheaded a $40 billion funding round in OpenAI, which has been valued at $300 billion. If the restructuring isn’t finalized by year-end, SoftBank retains the option to reduce its overall investment to $20 billion, according to sources familiar with the latest funding developments.

This is an evolving story. Please check back for updates.

Feel free to modify it further if needed!

Source: www.nytimes.com

Zuckerberg explains decision to purchase Instagram and WhatsApp instead of building the app from scratch

Posted on by
Reply

During the second day of the Landmark antitrust trial, Meta Chief Executive Mark Zuckerberg explained his decision to acquire Instagram and WhatsApp, citing the difficulty of building a new app. He avoided addressing questions about potential competitive threats to the company.

Zuckerberg mentioned that building a new app is a challenging task and that the company had attempted to create multiple apps in the past without much success. He acknowledged that they could have developed an app, but success was not guaranteed.

His testimony is crucial in the antitrust trial at the U.S. District Court in the District of Columbia. The trial focuses on allegations that Meta engaged in anti-competitive practices through its acquisitions of Instagram and WhatsApp.

If the government succeeds, Meta could be required to divest these two apps.

However, legal experts believe the FTC faces significant challenges in proving its case. The lawsuit against Meta forms part of broader efforts by U.S. regulators to address the market power of major tech companies.

The trial against Meta comes amidst similar legal actions against other tech giants like Amazon, Google, and Apple for alleged anti-competitive behavior.

In a closely watched trial, the FTC accused Meta of using its acquisitions of Instagram and WhatsApp to stifle competition and limit consumer choice.

Meta’s legal team refuted the allegations, highlighting the company’s competition with other social media platforms. They argued that revisiting and undoing the merger approval would set a dangerous precedent.

During Tuesday’s proceedings, FTC lawyers questioned Zuckerberg about internal communications related to the acquisitions of Instagram and WhatsApp, revealing discussions about competition and strategic decisions.

Zuckerberg’s testimony spanned seven hours, with Instagram co-founders scheduled to testify later in the week.

In emails from years ago, Zuckerberg discussed the competitive landscape and strategic moves to maintain Facebook’s dominance in the market. These communications have become central to the antitrust trial.

Zuckerberg’s emails revealed concerns about emerging competitors and strategies to block them from advertising on Facebook. The trial continues to scrutinize Meta’s actions in the competitive tech industry.

Zuckerberg’s communications shed light on the company’s approach to competition and strategic acquisitions, raising questions about its impact on the tech industry.

As the trial progresses, stakeholders are closely watching the outcome and its implications for the regulation of big tech companies.

Source: www.nytimes.com

Trump claims we are in discussions with four parties regarding the TikTok sale, asserting, “The final decision rests with me.”

Posted on by
Reply

Donald Trump stated on Sunday that negotiations are ongoing with four interested parties looking to acquire TikTok, and the Chinese-owned app is facing an uncertain future in the United States.

According to U.S. law, TikTok was mandated to be sold by its Chinese owner or face a ban in the country. When asked about the possibility of a deal on Sunday, Trump told reporters, “It could happen.”

“We are in discussions with four different groups, and there is significant interest, ultimately the decision lies with me,” he said aboard Air Force 1.

“All four potential buyers are reputable,” he added.

The TikTok ban came into effect on January 19th due to concerns that the Chinese government could potentially exploit the video-sharing platform to spy on Americans and manipulate public opinion.

TikTok was temporarily removed from the U.S. market and disappeared from app stores as the legal deadline approached, leaving millions of users disappointed. Trump paused the ban two and a half months after starting his second term in January, seeking a resolution with Beijing. TikTok later resumed its operations in the U.S. and returned to the Apple and Google App Stores in February.

Among the potential TikTok buyers is an initiative called “The People’s Bid for TikTok,” spearheaded by real estate and sports mogul Frank McCourt’s Project Liberty Initiative. Another interested group includes Microsoft, Oracle, and internet personality MrBeast, also known as Jimmy Donaldson.

TikTok does not appear to be in a rush to sell its platform.

Skip past newsletter promotions

During his first term in office, Trump attempted to ban TikTok in the U.S. citing national security concerns.

Source: www.theguardian.com

Nick Clegg justifies Meta’s decision to remove fact checkers from Facebook and Instagram

Posted on by
Reply

Nick Clegg has strongly supported Meta’s decision to downgrade the social media platform’s moderation and remove fact-checkers.

The changes to Facebook, Instagram, and Threads, including a shift to promote more political content, were announced by CEO Mark Zuckerberg earlier this month.

Clegg, who is stepping down from the tech company after six years to make room for Joel Kaplan, who leans towards Donald Trump, refuted claims that Meta was diminishing its commitment to truth.

Skip past newsletter promotions

“Please look at what Meta has announced. Ignore the noise, the politics, and the drama that accompanies it,” he said at the World Economic Forum in Davos, describing the new policy as “limited and tailored.” He asserted that.

The former UK deputy prime minister and Liberal Democrat leader stated: “There are still 40,000 people dedicated to safety and content moderation, and this year we will again invest $5 billion (£4 billion) a year in platform integrity. We still maintain the most advanced community standards in the industry.”

Clegg mentioned that Meta’s new community notes system, replacing its fact-checker, will resemble the one used by Elon Musk’s competing social media platform X, and will first be launched in the United States.

He described it as a “crowdsourcing or Wikipedia-style approach to misinformation” and suggested it might be “more scalable” than the fact-checkers that he believes have lost the public’s trust.

Zuckerberg, who has been collaborating closely with President Trump recently, simply aims to refine Meta’s content moderation approach, according to Clegg.

During a roundtable discussion with journalists at a ski resort in Switzerland, Mr. Clegg confirmed that he would not tolerate using the Meta platform in the future, forbidding the use of derogatory terms for groups of people or labeling LGBT individuals as “mentally ill.” Numerous expressions previously allowed were challenged.

Mr. Clegg continued to defend this stance, stating at an event in Davos: “It seems inconceivable to us that individuals can say things in Congress or traditional media that they cannot say on social media. Therefore, some significant adjustments were made.”

He emphasized that speech targeting individuals in a manner designed to intimidate or harass remains unacceptable.

Source: www.theguardian.com

Fact-checkers react negatively to Meta’s decision to transition to a scrappy role

Posted on by
Reply

Founder of Facebook
Mark Zuckerberg

His company Meta announced on Tuesday that it would scrap the facts.
He accused the US checkers of making biased decisions and said he wanted greater freedom of speech. Meta uses third-party independent fact checkers from around the world. Here, one of them, who works at the Full Fact organization in London, explains what they do and their reaction to Zuckerberg’s “mind-boggling” claims.

I was a fact checker at Full Fact in London for a year, investigating questionable content on Facebook, X and newspapers. Our diet is filled with disinformation videos about wars in the Middle East and Ukraine, as well as fake AI-generated video clips of politicians, which are becoming increasingly difficult to disprove. There is. Colleagues are tackling coronavirus disinformation, misinformation about cancer treatments, and there’s a lot of climate-related talk as there are more hurricanes and wildfires.

As soon as you log on at 9am, you’re assigned something to watch. By accessing Meta’s system, you can see which posts are most likely to be false. In some cases, there may be 10 or 15 potentially harmful things and it can be overwhelming. But you can’t check everything.

If a post is a little wild but not harmful, like this AI-generated image of the Pope wearing a giant white puffer coat, we might leave it. But if it’s a fake image of Mike Tyson holding a Palestinian flag, we’re more likely to address it. We propose them in the morning meeting and are then asked to start checking.

Yesterday I was working on a deepfake video in which Keir Starmer said many of the claims about Jimmy Savile were frivolous and that was why he was not prosecuted at the time. We’re getting a lot of engagement. Starmer’s mouth did not look right and did not appear to say anything. It seemed like a false alarm. I immediately started doing a reverse image search and discovered that the video was taken from the Guardian newspaper in 2012. The original was of much higher quality. The area around his mouth is very blurry and you can see exactly what he’s saying when you compare it to what he shares on social media. We contacted the Guardian for comment on the original Downing Street. You can also get in touch with various media forensics and deepfake AI experts.

Some misinformation continues to resurface. There is a particular video of a gas station explosion in Yemen last year that has been reused as either a bombing in Gaza or a Hezbollah attack on Israel.

Fact checkers collect examples of how that information has appeared on social media in the past 24 hours or so, often times like the number of likes or shares, and how do they know when it’s incorrect? indicates.

Attaching fact checks to Facebook posts requires two levels of review. Senior colleagues question every leap in logic we make. For recurring claims, this process can be completed in half a day. New, more complex cases may take closer to a week. The average is about 1 day. It can be frustrating to go back and forth at times, but you want to be as close to 100% sure as possible.

It was very difficult to hear Mark Zuckerberg say that fact checkers are biased on Tuesday. Much of the work we do is about being fair, and that’s instilled in us. I feel it is a very important job to bring about change and provide good information to people.

This is something I wanted to do in my previous job in local journalism, go down rabbit holes and track down sources, but I didn’t have many opportunities. It was very Churnalism. As a local reporter, I was concerned and felt helpless at the amount of conspiracy theories people were seriously engaging with and believing in Facebook groups.

At the end of the day, it can be difficult to switch off. I’m still thinking about how to prove something as quickly as possible. When I see things like content stock prices constantly going up, I get a little worried. But when a fact check is published, there is a sense of satisfaction.

Zuckerberg’s decision was unfortunate. We put a lot of effort into this and we think it’s really important. But we renew our resolve to fight the good fight. Misinformation will never go away. We will continue to be here and fight against it.

Source: www.theguardian.com

Jeff Koons explains his decision to reject AI in the art world: “I refuse to take the easy way out”

Posted on by
Reply

HJeff Koons, the world’s most expensive artist, has faced criticism in the past for creating his famous balloon dogs and stainless steel rabbits without physically using his own hands. I have drawn a line. Work – I am contemplating using AI to enhance my work.

The art world is currently abuzz with discussions about the possibilities and risks of artificial intelligence. Deep learning models are now capable of replicating styles and generating unique compositions upon request.

Speaking to the Guardian at the launch of Reflections, a joint exhibition featuring his work alongside Pablo Picasso’s at Granada’s Alhambra Palace, Koons welcomed this divine development. His reliance on a team of craftsmen and cutting-edge technology to create his artwork led Collector magazine to question last year, “Is Jeff Koons a true artist?”




A work juxtaposed with Jeff Koons’ Ball of Gazes (David’s intervention with a Sabine woman) in Granada and Picasso’s Helmeted Head.

Koons has embraced technological advancements in his work. A highly mirror-polished stainless steel Rabbit he created five years ago, designed to mimic the look and materials of a balloon through intensive machining, fetched a record $91 million (£72.5 million). His previous bestseller, a 10-foot-tall steel balloon dog, sold for $58 million in 2013. Additionally, in February, 125 of his miniature lunar sculptures were sent to the moon via a SpaceX rocket, becoming the first authorized art pieces on the moon.

His Gazing ball series has been recreated, with a large blue glass bauble added to the shelf and selecting 35 out of 350 balls before finalizing the artwork. Koons is also exploring innovative avenues. He shared, “I have a few projects in mind. We have had insightful discussions with individuals at the forefront of AI development.”

Source: www.theguardian.com

Is Jaguar’s Electric Car Launch a Decision Too Big to Make? Expert Opinion from Jaguar Land Rover

Posted on by
Reply

JAguar finally revealed its highly anticipated Type 00 electric car at its Miami Art Week launch event. The marketing campaign teaser video released on social media two weeks ago generated mixed opinions. Here, industry experts share their thoughts on the car, its launch, and marketing.

Jeff Dodds

Former Honda Marketing Manager, current Chief Executive of Formula E, where Jaguar competes

I recently owned a Jaguar iPace. It’s a nice car, but it didn’t bring a smile to my face. That’s what I look for in a car. Jag knows this too.

If Jaguar’s goal was to grab attention at the launch, they definitely achieved it. There was a lot of anticipation leading up to the release, and some guests were eager to see the beastly monster unveiled. It wasn’t terrible, but it was quite unique. It’s larger, bolder, and more disruptive than I expected. It will definitely turn heads. Not everyone will love it, but that’s a good thing. Inspector Morse may not go for it, but his grandson might if he just started a cybersecurity startup.

The event itself was completely different, industrial, and edgy. British grime MC and rapper Skepta may not be the typical Jaguar brand ambassador, but there he was, performing a DJ set surrounded by influencers and cultural tastemakers in downtown Miami. That’s a significant departure from the past. Maybe too much deviation? Possibly. Jaguar has quickly become a brand of conversation in the past tense, so I commend them. I believe you’ll find joy in riding the Type 0.

Ginny Buckley

Founder of UK EV buying website Electrifying.com

In Jaguar’s 90-year history, no event has created more global buzz than a controversial rebrand. Now that the dramatic Type 00 cover has been unveiled, the new logo and flashy advertising may fade from memory.

I first saw this car at a briefing session at Jaguar Land Rover’s Midland Design Studio. In my over 25 years as a motoring journalist, no car has impressed me as much as this £100,000+ all-electric GT.

Mr Buckley says the new Jaguar Type 00 concept car is “much bigger, bolder and more disruptive than we ever imagined”. Photo: Electricifying.com

Yes, it’s pink. Very pink. Presented in Miami Pink and London Blue, the car’s colors reflect the city it was revealed in and Jaguar’s British heritage.

The color is inevitably a point of focus for many critics. According to Jaguar’s design team, this color is “production ready” and could stir things up among traditional Jaguar fans if it becomes part of the final color palette.

Beyond the color, the Type 00’s design is striking with a long hood, massive grille, and front-hinged butterfly doors. Jaguar has also eliminated the rear window.

I find the Type 0 to be fresh and bold. My 15-year-old son described it as “the best,” and I take that as a compliment.

Buckley said the Miami pink color “could cause a stir among traditional Jaguar fans.” Photo: Jason Koerner/Getty Images for Jaguar

“It’s going to challenge people and be polarizing,” said Jerry McGovern, Jaguar’s Chief Creative Officer. And it will. If their aim was to spark discourse, they have succeeded.

The question now is whether Jaguar can evolve the brand rapidly enough to attract the new generation of young, affluent buyers they hope will purchase the car.

Manfredi Ricca

Global Chief Strategy Officer at brand consulting firm Interbrand. He has collaborated with Bugatti and was instrumental in the relaunch of Mini and BMW.

Flashback to two weeks ago. Jaguars weren’t particularly interesting to many. Then, a 30-second video was released. Millions of heads turned instantly. In just 24 hours, Jaguar became a global talking point without unveiling any products.

Skip past newsletter promotions

Consequently, anticipation for the new lineup, with leaks surfacing on the eve of the release, has reached the intensity and reach of a World Cup final.

Campaigns designed for brand activation don’t get much better than this. Many overlook the fact that Jaguar Land Rover wasn’t attempting to evolve a successful brand; instead, it was reinventing a struggling one.

The reality today is that there are more people who appreciate Jaguar’s history than those who actually desire a Jaguar car.

Museums can subsist solely on the past, but commercial entities can’t. Companies must transform their legacy into something that attracts enough customers willing to pay a premium.

Ricca says the Jaguar Type 00 will “tempt” potential customers. Photo: Jason Koerner/Getty Images for Jaguar

Once a trailblazing manufacturer of some of the world’s most innovative cars, Jaguar is once again adored by a few rather than ignored by many.

The concept introduced in Miami will captivate those few, but the true test lies in turning them into enthusiasts in 2025 when the car hits the market, and customers in 2026.

Richard Exon

Co-founder of advertising agency Joint, previously collaborated with Audi and Range Rover.

Jaguar deserves praise for its ambitious rebranding efforts. Making a clean break from the past is the best approach. The company aims to attract an entirely new customer base with its latest car range, and a more modern, inclusive, and daring brand strategy could prove successful.

However, good intentions aren’t enough when the execution is as lackluster as Jaguar’s pre-launch promotional video content.

Exxon said Jaguar’s rebranding video was “derivative and disappointing.” Photo: Jaguar/PA

Fortunately, the concept car images feature a bold new aesthetic that demands a fresh evaluation.

The critical next step is how well the innovative design of the concept translates into the final manufactured product available for purchase.

Jaguar’s troubled car brands seldom get second chances, so let’s hope Jaguar rises to the occasion, rebounds from the video mishap, and dares to be as unique as it aspires to be.

Source: www.theguardian.com

The Regretful Decision: Surrendering My DNA to 23andMe Only to Discover My British Heritage

Posted on by
Reply

23andMe is currently in crisis. The once-promising genetic testing company has experienced a significant downfall, with a 98% loss in its $6 billion value, the departure of all independent directors, a reduction in nearly half of its employees, and a decline in its customer base from 15 million. is urgently working to delete DNA data from its records. I am one of the affected individuals.

My journey with 23andMe began hesitantly in 2016 when I ordered their kit by mail. After some delay, I finally submitted my genetic sample for analysis. As a tech journalist, I am cautious about sharing data with companies, especially genetic information, which is immutable unlike passwords or credit card details.

The results revealed that I am 63% British and Irish, and 17% Danish, confirming my extensive northwestern European heritage. However, the absence of my supposed Czech lineage was surprising. With 23andMe’s uncertain future and concerns about the fate of user data, I reflect on the exchange of genetic privacy for such information.

Timothy Caulfield, a University of Alberta professor, notes that many individuals, like myself, experience ambivalence upon receiving genetic test results.

The concept of genetic testing to uncover ancestral roots and its implications on personal identity has always troubled me. Caulfield, who faced similar concerns with his own ancestry, argues that the notion of genetic influence on individual identity perpetuates racism.

Marketing strategies played a significant role in the success of companies like 23andMe. However, the impact of genetic testing results on one’s sense of identity can vary drastically, from affirming to challenging deeply held beliefs.

As 23andMe’s future remains uncertain, questions arise regarding the handling of existing user data. The ethical implications of genetic information extend beyond personal privacy to potentially compromising the privacy of relatives.

To safeguard my data, I opted to delete my account and requested a copy of my genetic information. However, concerns persist about the retention of such data by the company, especially in case of bankruptcy or ownership changes.

23andMe’s commitment to customer data protection is emphasized, with assurances of maintaining privacy standards even amidst financial instability.

Receiving my genetic data opened up new insights into my heritage, but the challenge lies in interpreting the vast amount of genomic information provided. Despite this, I have not taken any actions based on this data, as the complexity of genetic identity remains a source of ambivalence and uncertainty.

Source: www.theguardian.com

Discovering the Hidden Obstacle that Hinders Your Decision Making.

Posted on by
Reply

We’ve all experienced that familiar feeling of embarrassment when we realize we’ve overlooked something important while being confident in our decisions. Maybe it’s the car in front suddenly stopping at a crosswalk, or someone mistakenly using the term “escapegoat” instead of “scapegoat.”

This phenomenon is due to a hidden bias in our brains that tricks us into believing we have all the necessary information to make decisions without considering crucial details.

undefined

A recent study identified this bias as the “illusion of information sufficiency,” which leads us to act as if we have complete knowledge to form opinions, make decisions, and judge others. This contradiction often results in misunderstandings and conflicts in our lives.

Psychologist Dr. Sandra Wheatley explains that taking shortcuts in decision-making is a way to navigate the complexities of the world. However, this tendency can lead us to make inaccurate judgments when we assume we have all the information we need.

The study involved 1,261 participants who were tasked with deciding whether to integrate two schools or keep them separate. Interestingly, participants who only saw one side of the argument were more confident in their decision-making than those who had access to both perspectives.

This overconfidence in limited information can prevent us from considering others’ viewpoints and understanding that our subjective truth may not always align with objective reality.

Dr. Wheatley emphasizes the importance of questioning sources and remaining open to information that challenges our beliefs when making important decisions or judgments about others.

About our experts

Dr. Sandra Wheatley is a Chartered Psychologist and an Associate Fellow of the British Psychological Society. She specializes in psychology, parenting, social relationships, and digital media.

read more:

Source: www.sciencefocus.com

NASA’s wise decision to implement a backup plan proved crucial in wake of the Starliner grounding

Posted on by
Reply

Whenever a rocket launch or mission goes wrong, experts always say the same thing: “Space is hard.” As advances in the space industry accelerate, this mantra has only grown more important, if not less, as we face—and, for the most part, overcome—the challenges of spaceflight with increasing frequency.

The situation that has unfolded aboard the International Space Station (ISS) over the past few months is a case in point: Boeing’s Starliner spacecraft successfully completed its first manned flight on June 5, but a hardware problem meant that after arriving at the ISS it was unclear whether the two NASA astronauts on board would be able to safely return to Earth as scheduled.

So after ground tests and much deliberation, NASA reversed course, announcing that its astronauts would stay longer and return instead in February 2025 aboard SpaceX’s Crew Dragon spacecraft (see “Astronauts stranded on ISS reveal U.S. space program not in peril.”) A potentially catastrophic problem was reduced to a mere inconvenience thanks to NASA’s wise decision a decade ago to hire not one but two companies to build the capsules that would carry astronauts into space. We’d always known space was a tough place, and preparation paid off.

The first ever private spacewalk will likely be the most dangerous one ever.

Hopefully, the thorough preparations will also pay off for the crew of SpaceX’s upcoming Polaris Dawn mission, which, if all goes well, will conduct the first-ever civilian spacewalk, and perhaps the most dangerous one ever (see page 8).

If the flight goes well, it will be another big win for commercial spaceflight, and especially for SpaceX, as it will be the first test of the company’s new spacesuit. Aging spacesuits have been a big problem for NASA and other space agencies for decades. The spacesuits NASA uses are the same ones astronauts wore in the 1980s and are long past their prime. A new spacesuit that is comfortable for civilians to wear, has better mobility, better temperature regulation and is more reliable would be a big win. It would make life in space a little easier.

topic:

Source: www.newscientist.com

“Meta moderation board stands by decision to permit use of ‘River to Sea’ in posts” | Meta

Posted on by
Reply

Meta’s content moderation board decided that implementing a complete ban on pro-Palestinian slogans would hinder freedom of speech. They supported the company’s choice to allow posts on Facebook that include the phrase “from the river to the sea.”

The oversight committee examined three instances of Facebook posts featuring the phrase “from the river to the sea” and determined that they did not break Meta’s rules against hate speech or incitement. They argued that a universal ban on the phrase would suppress political speech in an unacceptable manner.

In a decision endorsed by 21 members, the committee upheld Meta’s original decision to keep the content on Facebook, stating that it expressed solidarity with the Palestinian people and did not promote violence or exclusion.

The committee, whose content judgments are binding, mentioned that the phrase has various interpretations and can be used with different intentions. While it could be seen as promoting anti-Semitism and the rejection of Israel, it could also be interpreted as a show of support for the Palestinians.

The majority of the committee stated that the use of the phrase by Hamas, although banned from Meta’s platform and considered a terrorist organization by the UK and the US, does not automatically make the phrase violent or hateful.

However, a minority within the committee argued that as the phrase appeared in Hamas’s 2017 charter, its use in the post could be construed as praising the banned group, particularly following an attack by Hamas. The phrase “From the river to the sea, Palestine will be free” refers to the territory between the Jordan River and the Mediterranean Sea.

Opponents of the slogan claim it advocates for the elimination of Israel, while proponents like Palestinian-American author Yousef Munayyer argue it supports the idea of Palestinians living freely and equally in their homeland.

The ruling pointed out that due to the phrase’s multiple meanings, enforcing a blanket ban, removal of content, or using the phrase as a basis for review would impinge on protected political speech.

In one of the cases, a user responded to a video with the hashtag “FromTheRiverToTheSea,” which garnered 3,000 views. In another case, the phrase “Palestine will be free” was paired with an image of a floating watermelon slice, viewed 8 million times.

The third case involved a post by a Canadian community organization condemning “Zionist Israeli occupiers,” but had fewer than 1,000 views.

A Meta spokesperson, overseeing platforms like Instagram and Threads, remarked: “We appreciate the oversight committee’s evaluation of our policies. While our guidelines prioritize safety, we acknowledge the global complexities at play and regularly seek counsel from external experts, including our oversight committee.”

Source: www.theguardian.com

Families of individuals who passed away following pig organ transplants are at peace with their decision.

Posted on by
Reply

David Bennett Jr. knelt at his bedside, phone in hand, anxiously waiting for the call he’d never received before: The hospital was supposed to update him on whether his father, who had received a new heart transplanted from a pig, was still alive.

It was the first time a living human had received a pig organ transplant.

“I don’t know what the news is, but my dad opened his eyes, he was awake and he was OK. It was unbelievable,” Bennett Jr. said.

Bennett’s father, David Bennett Sr., had severe congestive heart failure and was not a candidate for a transplant. He knew he would likely die soon. There was nothing else he could do but take a chance on a novel, cutting-edge procedure. Bennett Sr. and his son agreed it was worth the risk.

The achievement made headlines around the world following the transplant in January 2022. Initially, the results looked promising, with some family members beginning to entertain the idea that Bennett Sr. might eventually be released from the hospital.

“There were definitely future-oriented conversations about the home environment, who was going to care for him and what that was going to look like,” Bennett Jr. said. “Everyone was very optimistic and hopeful.”

David Bennett Jr. and his family.
Jesse Barber, NBC News

But two months later, Bennett Sr.’s body rejected the heart and he died at age 57. paperDoctors at the University of Maryland Medical Center said his body likely produced too many antibodies to fight the new organ. The drugs he was given may have also increased the chance of rejection, and a virus in the pig’s heart further complicates things.

Three other patients have followed in Bennett Sr.’s footsteps and received pig organs, most recently a pig kidney transplant in April. Together, they are pioneers in the burgeoning field of xenotransplantation. For them, the journey has been a roller coaster of emotions, from anxiety to blind hope and ultimately praise for their loved one’s decision, three family members told NBC News.

“Obviously, I wish my dad was still here, but I know his sacrifice was not in vain,” Bennett Jr. said.

None of the patients survived more than three months. To the public, it may have seemed a failure. But to their families, the transplants had accomplished a goal: to buy their loved ones more time and to advance research that may one day save their lives.

“Larry thought: He’s going to die. It’s inevitable, it’s coming,” says Anne Fawcett, whose husband of nearly 38 years, Laurence Fawcett, is the second person to receive a pig heart transplant. “So to gather as much data as we can, to do as much research as we can, why not use Larry’s body as a test subject, to give people in the future who need a transplant another option?”

The potential of xenotransplantation lies in the shortage of available human organs. 17 people die every day in the United States while waiting for an organ transplantBecause pig organs are more readily available, doctors expect such surgeries to become as common as hip replacements in the future, according to the Health Resources and Services Administration.

Source: www.nbcnews.com

AI Researcher Develops Chatbot Based on Future-Self Concept to Assist in Decision Making

Posted on by
Reply

If spending time on the couch, binging fast food, drinking too much alcohol or not paying into your company pension is ruining your carefully laid plans for life, it might be time to have a conversation with your future self.

With time machines not readily available, researchers at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology (MIT) have developed an AI-powered chatbot that simulates a user’s past self and offers observations and valuable wisdom in the hope of encouraging people to think more today about who they want to be tomorrow.

By digitally de-aging profile photos so that younger users appear as wrinkled, grey-haired seniors, the chatbot generates plausible artificial memories and weaves a story about a successful life based on the user’s current aspirations.

“The goal is to encourage long-term changes in thinking and behavior,” says Pat Pataranuthapong, who works on the Future You project at the MIT Media Lab, “which may motivate people to make smarter choices in the present that optimize their long-term well-being and life outcomes.”

In one conversation, an aspiring biology teacher asked a chatbot, a 60-year-old version of herself, about the most rewarding moment in her career so far. The chatbot, responding that she was a retired biology teacher in Boston, recalled a special moment when she turned a struggling student’s grades around. “It was so gratifying to see my student’s face light up with pride and accomplishment,” the chatbot said.

To interact with the chatbot, users are first asked to answer a series of questions about themselves, their friends and family, the past experiences that have shaped them, and the ideal life they envision for themselves in the future. They then upload a portrait image, which the program then digitally ages to create a portrait of them at 60 years old.

The program then feeds information from the user’s answers into a large language model to generate a rich synthetic memory for the simulated older version of itself, ensuring that the chatbot draws on a coherent background story when responding to questions.

The final part of the system is the chatbot itself, powered by OpenAI’s GPT3.5, which introduces itself as a potential older version of the user and can talk about their life experiences.

Pattaranuthapong has had several conversations with his “future self,” but the most memorable was when the chatbot reminded him that his parents won’t be together forever, so he should spend time with them while he still can. “The perspective I gained from that conversation is still influential to me today,” he said.

Users are told that their “future self” is not a prediction, but a potential future self based on the information they provide, and are encouraged to explore different futures by varying their survey answers.

be A preprint scientific paper on the projectA trial of 344 volunteers, which hasn’t been peer-reviewed, found that talking to a chatbot made people feel less anxious and more connected to their future selves. Pattaranthapong said this stronger connection should encourage better life choices, from focusing on specific goals and exercising regularly to eating healthier and saving for the future.

Ivo Vlaev, professor of behavioural science at the University of Warwick, said people often struggle to imagine themselves in the future, but doing so could lead to stronger adherence to education, healthier lifestyles and more careful financial planning.

He called the MIT project a “fascinating application” of behavioral science principles. “It embodies the idea of a nudge, a subtle intervention designed to steer behavior in a beneficial direction by making your future self more salient and relevant to the present,” he said. “Implemented effectively, this could have a profound impact on how people make decisions today with their future well-being in mind.”

“From a practical standpoint, its effectiveness will depend on how well it simulates meaningful, relevant conversations,” he added. “If users perceive the chatbot as authentic and insightful, it can have a significant impact on behavior. But if the interaction feels superficial or quirky, its impact may be limited.”

Source: www.theguardian.com

Improving the Outcomes of Life’s Big Choices: A Guide to Decision Making

Posted on by
Reply

You could argue that LIFE is like a long game of blackjack. A common version of this is that each person is first dealt her two playing cards. The goal is to increase your hand to 21, or as close to this as possible without bursting. Players can either “stick” with their existing hand or “twist” it by requesting that they be dealt another card to add to their total. Of course, going over 21 risks being eliminated.

This may sound far from an everyday choice, but many of the most important decisions in our lives end up in dilemmas like this. Should I stay like this or should I take the plunge and move house? Should you keep your job or start your own business? Should you put up with an unsatisfactory relationship, or try your hand at love another time? In each case, we have to weigh the safety of what we have against riskier but potentially more valuable alternatives.

The uncertainty inherent in these dilemmas causes many of us to become paralyzed and stagnant in our analysis, ending up staying where we are and not giving ourselves a chance to win big. In contrast, some people are easily swayed by the lure of new things. They quickly turn to gambling until they lose everything due to impulsive behavior. If any of these scenarios sound familiar, help may be on the way. Thanks to a greater understanding of our underlying cognitive biases and how to escape them, we now have evidence-based strategies to think more rationally about these challenges, so we can put our lives on the line. Playing the game gives us the most benefit.

Source: www.newscientist.com

Improving the Outcome of Major Life Decisions: A Guide to Decision Making

Posted on by
Reply

You could argue that LIFE is like a long game of blackjack. A common version of this is that each person is first dealt her two playing cards. The goal is to increase your hand to 21, or as close to this as possible without bursting. Players can either “stick” with their existing hand or “twist” it by requesting that they be dealt another card to add to their total. Of course, going over 21 risks being eliminated.

This may sound far from an everyday choice, but many of the most important decisions in our lives end up in dilemmas like this. Should I stay like this or should I take the plunge and move house? Should you keep your job or start your own business? Should you put up with an unsatisfactory relationship, or try your hand at love another time? In each case, we have to weigh the safety of what we have against riskier but potentially more valuable alternatives.

The uncertainty inherent in these dilemmas causes many of us to become paralyzed and stagnant in our analysis, staying where we are and never getting the chance to win big. In contrast, some people are easily swayed by the lure of new things. They are quick to gamble until they lose everything due to impulsive behavior. If any of these scenarios sound familiar, help may be on the way. Thanks to a greater understanding of our underlying cognitive biases and how to escape them, we now have evidence-based strategies to think more rationally about these challenges, so we can put our lives on the line. Playing the game gives us the most benefit.

Source: www.newscientist.com

Biden Campaign’s Decision to Join TikTok Sparks National Security Concerns

Posted on by
Reply

The chairman of the U.S. Senate Intelligence Committee, a ranking Democrat, said he is concerned about President Joe Biden’s campaign’s decision to join TikTok.

On Sunday, Biden’s re-election campaign used the Super Bowl to launch a new TikTok account to reach younger voters ahead of November’s presidential election.

The launch of the campaign on TikTok is notable given that the app, owned by Chinese tech company ByteDance, is under review in the United States due to potential national security concerns. Some U.S. lawmakers have called for the app to be banned over concerns that the Chinese government could access user data and influence what people see on the app.


On Monday, Democratic Sen. Mark Warner said he was concerned about the national security implications.

“I think we still need to find a way to follow India, which banned TikTok,” Warner said. “I’m a little worried about the mixed messages.”

Many Republicans have also criticized the campaign’s decision to join TikTok.

White House Press Secretary John Kirby said nothing has changed regarding “national security concerns” regarding the use of TikTok on government devices. That policy continues today. “

Last year, the Biden administration ordered government agencies to remove TikTok from federally owned phones and devices.

TikTok insists it does not share U.S. user data with the Chinese government and has taken substantial steps to protect user privacy. The company did not respond to Reuters’ request for comment.

The Biden campaign said in a statement that it will “continue to meet voters where they are,” including on other social media apps such as Meta’s Instagram and Truth Social, founded by former President Donald Trump.

The campaign has “advanced security measures” in place for its devices and its presence on TikTok is separate from the app’s ongoing security review, campaign officials added.

In March 2023, the U.S. Treasury Department-led Committee on Foreign Investment in the United States (CFIUS) demanded that TikTok’s Chinese owners sell their shares or face the app being banned, but the administration No action was taken.

White House press secretary Karine Jean-Pierre said Monday that a review by CFIUS is underway, filed by Warner and others to give the government new tools to combat threats posed by foreign-owned apps. He noted previous White House support for the bill.

Last month, TikTok told Congress that 170 million Americans now use the short video platform, up from 150 million the year before.

Reuters contributed to this report

Source: www.theguardian.com

Mehta’s reversal of the decision to remove two videos about the Israel-Hamas war

Posted on by
Reply

Meta’s oversight board has reversed the social media company’s decision to remove two videos about the Israel-Hamas war from its platform.

One of the videos in question was posted on Facebook of an Israeli woman who was taken hostage in the October 7 attack on Israel and begs her kidnappers not to kill her.

“Another incident concerns a video posted on Instagram during an Israeli ground offensive in the northern Gaza Strip that appears to be the aftermath of an attack on or near Al-Shifa Hospital in Gaza City.”Yes,” the monitoring committee said.

The semi-independent 22-member board that oversees meth-owned sites Facebook and Instagram ruled that the posts alerted the world to “human suffering on both sides,” the company said in a statement. announced on Monday.

Although “the posts show deaths and injuries to Palestinians, including children,” the committee said Mehta must maintain “freedom of expression and freedom of access to information.”

Meta reinstated two videos from the Israel-Hamas war that were circulating on its platform after the company’s oversight board said the posts “signaled the world to the human suffering on both sides.” . Reuters

In both cases, the board “approved the company’s subsequent decision to display a warning screen and reinstate the posts,” and said the company’s initial “expedited review” had concluded.

In an expedited review, the oversight committee must make a decision within 30 days instead of the usual 90 days.

In this case, it took just 12 days for board members to reach a conclusion on the two videos in question, highlighting how quickly social media companies must act when it comes to handling content related to disputes. highlighted.

Oversight Committee Co-Chairman Michael McConnell said, “The Oversight Committee remains focused on protecting the right to free expression of people from all walks of life about these horrific events, while ensuring that any testimony does not preclude violence.” “We assured them that it was not intended to incite hatred or incite hatred.”

“These testimonials are important not only to speakers, but also to users around the world who seek timely and diverse information about groundbreaking events.”

One of the videos, which Mehta deleted from Facebook and later restored, showed an “Israeli woman taken hostage in the October 7 attack in Israel, pleading with her kidnappers not to kill her.” The committee explained that Getty Images

Commenting on the lawsuit’s ruling, Mehta said: blog post On Tuesday, it confirmed that the two posts had been reinstated, saying: “Therefore, no further action will be taken.”

“We welcome the Oversight Board’s decision on this matter today,” Mehta said, adding that “expression and safety are both important to us and the people who use our services.”

The move comes amid increased scrutiny of social media platforms’ moderation policies.

The second video in question was posted on Instagram and “shows what appears to be the aftermath of a strike at or near Al-Shifa Hospital in Gaza City,” the monitoring committee said. Getty Images

The European Union recently opened an investigation into Company X, owned by Elon Musk, after the site formerly known as Twitter complied with rules requiring social media platforms to combat illegal content and disinformation. I checked to see if it was there.

In its proceedings, the European Commission “assessed whether “I will.”

This is the first investigation of its kind under the new law, with the site submitting a risk assessment report in September, followed by a transparency report a month later, stating that it was This was done after responding to a request for information. Background to Hamas’s terrorist attack on Israel, according to a press release.

The committee specifically noted that Musk’s social media platforms may not have taken effective measures to “counter the manipulation of information on their platforms.”

Source: nypost.com