31 Ekim 2016 Pazartesi

If Trump Wins, He Can Keep Obama's Twitter Followers — But Not His Tweets

Barack Obama was the first US president on Twitter, and he won't be the last. So what happens to the @POTUS Twitter handle after the election?

When Obama leaves office on January 20, 2017, Twitter will transfer his tweets to the new account @ POTUS44, which will contain all of his previous tweets, according to a statement from the White House. The 45th US president, whoever that will be, will then receive the handle @ POTUS, which will begin tabula rasa with no tweets on the timeline.

As for Instagram and Facebook, the incoming presidential administration will own the White House username, URL, and followers, and it will also begin its term with a blank timeline. The same is true of the Vice President and First Lady's social media accounts.

If Hillary Clinton is elected, Bill Clinton will likely be referred to as the "First Gentleman of the United States." The White House's statement did not cover the account @ FGOTUS, though the account currently sports an "about me" stating "I'm obviously with her."

The current accounts for the Vice President, First Lady, White House, and other associated accounts will become "VP44," "FLOTUS44," "WhiteHouse44," and so on, the White House's statement reads. The accounts with "44" appended will remain under the control of Joe Biden, Michelle Obama, and their staffers.

Obama was also the first president to use Snapchat, YouTube, and Facebook Live to engage with the public. The National Archives and Records Administration (NARA) will preserve the social media created by Obama's administration in a publicly accessible archive.

NARA will also archive content from other digital arms of the Obama administration. The We the People petition platform and Obama's version of WhiteHouse.gov will also be available in the NARA archives. You can follow the transition on @WHWeb.

Donald Trump (@ realDonaldTrump) and Hillary Clinton (@ HillaryClinton) have amassed 12.8 and 10.1 million followers, respectively, while @ POTUS has 11.1 million at the time of reporting. Trump has remarked in the past that he would "totally accept the election results if I win" and has made claims that the election is rigged, making it unclear how he would approach a digital transition of power.

Neither Hillary Clinton's nor Donald Trump's campaign responded immediately to requests for comment on how they would handle a digital transition of power or if they would keep posting from their existing accounts.

Here is an archive of all 317 of @POTUS' tweets scraped by BuzzFeed News.



from BuzzFeed - Tech http://ift.tt/2e76jwU
via IFTTT

The Facepalm Emoji Is Finally Coming To iOS

Shrug, facepalm, and avocado are just a few of the new emojis in the iOS 10.2 developer preview.

Today, Apple released a developer preview of iOS 10.2. The update includes the "facepalm" and "selfie" emoji first approved by the Unicode Consortium in June.

Today, Apple released a developer preview of iOS 10.2. The update includes the "facepalm" and "selfie" emoji first approved by the Unicode Consortium in June.

Apple

Shrug

Shrug

Apple


View Entire List ›



from BuzzFeed - Tech http://ift.tt/2fy8RsW
via IFTTT

Twitter May Have Accidentally Rolled Out A New Abuse-Prevention Tool

This weekend, some Twitter users noticed a new "muted words" feature appear inside their iOS apps, fueling speculation that the social network may be close to revealing new abuse prevention tools.

The feature was spotted Friday evening but appears to have been taken offline only minutes later. From the screenshots, the tool seems to allow you to mute keywords and hashtags so that they don't show up in your timeline. Instagram rolled out a similar feature this September, along with a “default” filter, which hides posts if they include offensive words from a preset list.

While a keyword filter could protect from spoilers or keep distracting events from your timeline, the tool's primary focus would be to protect users from targeted abuse by allowing them to personally filter everything from racial slurs to personalized insults that traditional algorithms might not catch. In August, Bloomberg reported Twitter had been considering the implementation of a filtering feature for the better part of a year. Just last week, Twitter hinted that abuse and safety tools would be forthcoming, which has struggled to contain a rapidly growing harassment problem.

Twitter did not respond as to whether we'll see a "muted words" feature soon. If implemented, the tool would be a meaningful step to give users the agency to protect themselves on the platform.

Some critics, though, see keyword filtering as only one half of the problem and urge that platforms like Twitter adopt more stringent abuse reporting and enforcement procedures, as well as pre-emptive filtering that doesn't require users to do anything. Twitter has taken steps in this area — this year it rolled out a quality filter algorithm to weed potentially abusive tweets from users' timelines. But it still has a long way to go.



from BuzzFeed - Tech http://ift.tt/2f6qfls
via IFTTT

Why Samsung Still Doesn't Know What's Causing Galaxy Note7 Explosions

A participant wearing a Samsung Galaxy Note7 costume walks in Kawasaki, Japan after a Halloween parade on October 30, 2016.

Kim Kyung-hoon / Reuters

Six weeks since Samsung first recalled its once-ballyhooed Galaxy Note 7 smartphones, and more than three weeks since it stopped selling them entirely, the company still doesn't know what, precisely, is causing its flagship phone to catch fire. For the Korean electronics giant, that has spelled disaster. The company stands to lose 17 billion dollars in revenue, even as its reputation plunges in key markets across the world.

An official accident report Samsung filed with the Korea Agency of Technology, which Buzzfeed News obtained, confirms the company still doesn't know what led to 35 reported cases of battery-induced Note7 damage around the world. According to the document, despite an initial diagnosis of "marginal errors" during the battery cell manufacturing process that ultimately resulted in a heat-producing short circuit in Note7 phones, it's unclear if this is the cause behind all the fires. Samsung confirmed the report is authentic, but declined to comment on its ongoing investigation.

In other words, one of the 20 richest companies in the world, a global conglomerate worth half a trillion dollars, can't quickly figure out what's causing one of its flagship products to reportedly set cars on fire. Even though Samsung is bleeding money and trust with each day it doesn't have an answer, it very well may be months before the company has an explanation — and can try to assure consumers its next phones won't have the same problem.

"If I was Samsung, I'd be gathering phones like crazy. Those have the best clues."

None of this is surprising to Glen Stevick, a mechanical engineer, failure analyst, and the founder of Berkeley Engineering and Research, which has studied dozens of lithium ion fires. Stevick, who helped determine what made the Deepwater Horizon explode, said that getting to the bottom of a major consumer recall case like this takes time — six months to a year "to know everything." That would, by certain standards, be quick: It took nearly two years after the first reports of problems with the lithium ion batteries in the Boeing 787 Dreamliner for the National Transportation Safety Board to release its official report.

That's because, according to Stevick, these are huge undertakings, and not ones that just take place in a lab. Before Samsung's engineers can start to analyze the exploding phones, the company has to collect them.

"If I was Samsung, I'd be gathering phones like crazy. Those have the best clues," Stevick said.

That means not just the 35 phones that caught fire, but hundreds of other Note 7s in various states of use. Only then, said Stevick, can "you start slicing those batteries and putting them under an electron microscope. Gradually the issues will appear."
What Samsung's failure analysis team would be looking for, Stevick said, are dendrites: microscopic lithium fibers that can grow — vine-like — over time from the anode (negative pole) of the battery, across a thin separator, to the cathode (positive pole). When the two poles connect, watch out: You've got a short circuit and a potential fire.

The two main culprits behind out-of-control dendrite growth, charging too deeply and charging too fast, happen to be correlated with features consumers want: namely, better battery life and faster phone recharging. But it's not as simple as blaming one or the other. Perhaps both are a problem. Perhaps the electrolyte separator — which keeps the anode and cathode apart – is too thin and therefore too easy for the lithium tendrils to bridge. Or perhaps the design of the battery case squished the battery too much, again making it easier for the two poles to connect.

Or maybe, as Samsung initially claimed, there were battery manufacturing issues, things like, as Stevick put it, "someone leaving a door open in the clean room," allowing in dust that could lead to a short circuit. Maybe that was a one-time mistake, affecting only a limited set of batteries, that has since been solved. Or maybe not.

Ruling out all of the potential causes, and their permutations, simply takes time. And plotting these issues to a predictive curve is a major challenge, Stevick said, one that can take carefully analyzing hundreds and hundreds of phones.
"Those things can overlap on you," Stevick said, "And you can be all over the place trying to fix it. It isn't easy."

Jihye Lee contributed to the reporting in this story.



from BuzzFeed - Tech http://ift.tt/2fo1SDx
via IFTTT

29 Ekim 2016 Cumartesi

The Growing Pains Of "League Of Legends,” The World's Most Popular Video Game

Visitors listen to commentators after a battle between international teams during a League of Legends tournament on May 8, 2014 in Paris.

Lionel Bonaventure / AFP / Getty Images

League of Legends, a multiplayer online battle arena game, is the most popular video game and one of the most-watched esports in the world. One hundred million people play it on their PCs every month. And today is the finale of the game’s month-long World Championship Series. In front of 18,000 people in Los Angeles’ Staples center and tens of millions more online, the final two teams, Samsung Galaxy and SK Telecom T1, will fight.

Working in teams of five from a giant stage with a Jumbotron above their heads, players will each take control of one of 133 magical heroes — choices include a warrior, a mummy, and a nine-tailed fox — to try to destroy their enemy’s base. Just like Olympic athletes prepare for a chance at the big games, the professionals playing in the LoL world championships have practiced the game relentlessly for years to earn their spots in the competition.

As the League Championship Series (LCS), has grown, though, its players have started to expect more from the game that they’ve helped make into such a success. Riot Games, which created League of Legends, raked in $1.6 billion in revenue in 2015. Teams, by contrast, say they’re having trouble making enough money to sustain themselves.

The life of a professional gamer isn’t all joy and joysticks

It takes hundreds of hours for players to master something they call “the meta,” short for metagame. It’s the arcane book of plays for the millions of battle situations they can find themselves in. Players who spoke to BuzzFeed News when they were in San Francisco to play in the first round of championship games said they practice at least eight hours a day, six days a week. The season runs from January to October if a team does well. Before tournaments, that daily schedule can lengthen with extra preparation, and players can find themselves locked in battle for as much as 14 hours per day.

They could practice less, but, as Alexander “Abaxial” Haibel, coach of the Brazilian team INTZ, told BuzzFeed News, “then you would be bad.” The current career of a professional player is two to four years. There are very few veteran players.

Despite all that hard work, “the [monetary] gain from being a player or a caster [an announcer] in the LCS right now is not good enough,” Jacob “YamatoCanon” Mebdi, coach of the Splyce LoL team, told BuzzFeed News.

Capital is flooding into the discipline as more mainstream backers hope to cash in on the niche game’s high viewership stats. The Philadelphia 76ers just bought two esports teams, and some players are worth millions. But not everyone is raking in money. Andy “Reginald” Dinh, owner of Team SoloMid (TSM), arguably the most famous team in LoL, publicly castigated the gamemaker in August for failing to understand the dire financial situations of most pro teams.

According to the team owners and staff that spoke to BuzzFeed News in San Francisco, most, if not all, League of Legends teams run in the red.

A League of Legends World Championship match in San Francisco

Blake Montgomery

Splyce team owner Marty Strenczewilk told BuzzFeed News that his franchise, comprised of eight teams playing different games besides League of Legends, invests in LoL as a means of brand exposure, not making money. That team, he said, loses money. Other games earn revenue for his business.

Dinh expressed similar sentiments in a blog post: “I made no money for two years and had to borrow from my parents because I believed so much in the game...The reason why I started to invest in other games was because LCS left me no choice...Other publishers are more collaborative and provide more opportunities for teams and players to make revenue.”

In North America and Europe, Riot pays all starter players in the professional league $12,500 per split, which is what players call the two three-month seasons per year. If a player is good enough to start on one of the 20 teams in the LCS, he or she can take home a slice of the $2 million awarded to the winning World Championship team.

The total LoL world championship prize pool is $5 million. Defense of the Ancients 2, a less popular esport, offers championship winnings of $20 million. Riot has kept the pool low intentionally by not opening it up to crowdfunding in the past, which DoTA uses to increase its prizes. DoTA fans buy championship-specific in-game items and activities, and their purchases contribute to the tournament’s pool. Riot has adopted the crowdfunding model this year.

Whalen “Magus” Rozelle, director of esports at Riot Games, told BuzzFeed News, “We don’t focus on the prize pool because it’s just for winners, but it seems we’ve underdone the pool.” He expects it to increase in the future.

After Dinh’s public criticism, Riot released a letter offering some concessions and promises to keep improving the league’s economics. The company said it would start offering winning teams a quarter of the revenue from the “skins” — cosmetic, digital modifications players can buy for their champions — that carry the teams’ names. (Riot has previously kept the revenue from team skins for itself.) The company also said it’s working to expand its media distribution, though it wouldn’t offer any details. (Riot does not give any part of broadcast revenue to LCS teams.)

Even still, Hans Christian “Liq” Durr, manager of Splyce’s League of Legends team, told BuzzFeed News, “Riot’s recent move is a baby step in comparison to the digital items in [games like] Counter Strike: Global Offensive or DoTA [Defense of the Ancients] 2. There are not as many possibilities for revenue in LoL as there are in other disciplines.”

Announcers, known as "casters" within esports, at a League of Legends World Championship match in San Francisco.

Blake Montgomery

So how can teams make enough money to keep playing?

According to Harris Peskin, general counsel and chief of operations for the LoL team H2K, sponsorships are the primary way a team earns money. But, like everything else in professional League of Legends, it’s complicated. Riot controls what sponsors a team can represent.

Rozelle told BuzzFeed News that Riot draws a sharp distinction between sponsoring the teams and sponsoring the league. To players, however, that separation may not be so clear. In August, Riot demanded that TSM remove an HTC-sponsored YouTube video from the team’s own channel that showed team members playing a game with an HTC Vive virtual reality headset. Riot saw it as an ad for a competing game. HTC responded by saying it wanted to support the sport but could see very few ways to continue doing so because of the severe limitations Riot placed on sponsors.

Rozelle sees it differently: “We want teams to have lots of sponsors, and we don’t believe our guidelines are too stringent,” he told BuzzFeed News. “We do impose greater restrictions on sponsorships of the league itself than on teams, but that’s not money we’re taking away from players. We allow teams to have a tremendous number of sponsors — just look at the logos all over their jerseys.”

Teams are counting on more than what they’re wearing to make money. “Our sponsors don’t just want a jersey logo,” Splyce’s Strenczewilk said. “Sponsorship is such a challenge because Riot is so controlled, so structured... They exercise the most involved control of any esports publisher.”

The "Summoner's Cup," the prize for winning the tournament.

Blake Montgomery

That’s not an exaggeration. Riot Games occupies a singular place even within esports: In addition to owning LoL, it owns and operates the professional league. That would be like if the NFL itself had created football and owned all the channels that broadcast football games. Activision Blizzard, Electronic Arts, Nintendo, and other esports publishers operate their leagues through partners with sports management expertise.

That vertically integrated ownership means that Riot looks unfavorably at any attempts to start an LCS competitor. Rozelle outlined the company’s views by saying, “Third-party organizations don’t provide a stable foundation. High quality production and stability are byproducts of Riot owning the league and the game. We’re responsible for the evolution of the ecosystem from top to bottom.”

A single high-level league also means that team owners and players have no option to leave if they aren’t satisfied with Riot’s management of their profession. Strenczewilk told BuzzFeed News, “The ecosystem of the game and the league is weaker because Riot owns them both.”

What comes next?

One way forward for LoL teams may require following the lead of professional sports leagues like the NFL, MLB, and NBA, to establish a players’ union.

Several Splyce players see organization as “inevitable,” but they didn’t have an idea of when, or how, a union would coalesce. INTZ’s coach Haibel told BuzzFeed News, “It’s starting to happen as we begin to think more about the future. Right now, there’s very little job stability or future prospects. The short player careers limit the kind of long-term thinking needed for a union.”

Rozelle told BuzzFeed News that a LoL players’ union will probably come about and that Riot would be “heavily involved” in its creation. He wouldn’t speculate as to what that involvement would look like, though he told BuzzFeed News that he doesn’t feel a union would be a bad thing.

If Riot is as involved in the creation of a players’ union as it has been so far with every other aspect of League of Legends, that could complicate the LCS even further. Dennis Coates, a professor at the University of Maryland Baltimore County who studies sports economics, told BuzzFeed News, “If the ownership would organize the players and negotiate with itself for the players’ salaries — as it seems likely to do — that would be a clear conflict of interest.”

Colin Nimer, a freelance esports journalist, told BuzzFeed News that in his experience, most esports have a few years of popularity. But dozens of new games hit the market every year, and some of them will inevitably become esports that compete with LoL. A 100 million people playing LoL per month means that Riot has succeeded in selling its game to a huge audience. But there’s no guarantee that audience will stay.

Professional play has been integral in making LoL so successful. If the game's professionals can’t sustain their careers, Riot’s revenue and relevance may also fade.



from BuzzFeed - Tech http://ift.tt/2dRI2Q1
via IFTTT

28 Ekim 2016 Cuma

Elon Musk Wants To Power Every Home With A Solar Roof

Tesla

UNIVERSAL CITY, Calif. — A rare cloudy, gray day in Los Angeles cleared up in the late afternoon before Elon Musk took to a stage at Universal Studios to unveil Tesla’s latest product — a solar roof that he envisions will one day sit atop every home.

“The houses you see around you are all solar houses. Did you notice?” Musk said, referring to a cul de sac of houses outfitted with glass tile solar roofs and Tesla’s new $5,500 Powerwall 2 home battery, which packs enough juice to power the lights, sockets, and a refrigerator for a four-bedroom home for a full day.

“The goal is to have solar roofs that look better" with an "installed cost that is less than the cost of a normal roof plus the cost of electricity," the Tesla Motors CEO said.

The event, which drew more than 1,000 people, came 3 weeks before a Nov. 17 vote where Tesla shareholders will decide whether the two companies should formally merge. Tesla made an offer to acquire SolarCity in June. He also happens to be chairman of SolarCity, the solar energy company led by his cousin. Since announcing the merger, Musk has described the deal as a “no-brainer.” Tesla’s mission, after all, is to “accelerate the world’s transition to sustainable energy.”

Priya Anand/BuzzFeed News

For Tesla, acquiring SolarCity would help the company move toward an ecosystem play: People who want to buy electric vehicles are more likely to have interest in sustainable energy at home, too. The solar roofs, made of quartz, would have a “quasi-infinite” shelf life, according to Musk. “Really, it’s never going to wear out,” he said.

The companies expect to save $150 million annually due to “synergies” if the merger is approved, according to regulatory filings. Wall Street, however, has expressed concern that Tesla, which which surprised the markets this week by delivering a profit last quarter for the second time, would be taking on too much risk by acquiring the beleaguered solar energy company. (SolarCity has about $3.35 billion in debt, according to Bloomberg.)

Asked about investors’ concern, Musk said Friday, “This is not about balance sheet questions." He noted earlier that if shareholders were to vote down the merger, producing solar roofs en masse with SolarCity would be “unwieldy,” and “definitely suboptimal.”

Priya Anand/BuzzFeed News

Investors might see things differently. Tesla is facing four lawsuits from shareholders, who allege that the carmaker is breaching fiduciary duty by proposing to purchase the solar energy company. Wall Street has largely viewed the proposed merger as a major risk to Tesla’s business. Barclays analyst Brian Johnson called the solar roof unveiling “in our cynical view, part of their PR strategy to lay the groundwork for a vote” through a series of hyped announcements in recent weeks, culminating with the Universal Studios event.

Still, for Musk and Tesla, the Universal Studios event marked another big moment in a year of rapidfire headlines for his companies. Last week, Musk announced that all future Teslas would include the necessary hardware for self-driving capability. The company expects the software needed to demonstrate an autonomous ride from Los Angeles to New York will be ready by the end of next year. That news came as Tesla continues to face a federal investigation over the role its Autopilot driver assistance technology played in recent crashes. Meanwhile, Musk has also outlined his aerospace company SpaceX’s plans to eventually colonize Mars.

But at Universal Studios on Friday, it was all about the solar roofs, which Musk expects to begin rolling out next summer.

“This is the integrated future. You’ve got an electric car, a Powerwall, and a solar roof. It needs to be beautiful, powerful, and seamlessly integrated,” Musk said. “If all those things are true, why would you go any other direction?”



from BuzzFeed - Tech http://ift.tt/2fpoO4A
via IFTTT

Facebook Lets Advertisers Hide Ads From People Based On "Ethnic Affinities"

Facebook

One of Facebook's most appealing traits to advertisers is its ability to target users based on their interests and demographics. On the flipside, the site also gives advertisers the choice to hide ads from specific groups of users, a tactic called exclusion marketing. And this option can lead to unexpected and even unwanted results. A ProPublica report has found has found that Facebook allows advertisers to exclude certain “ethnic affinities” from their ad audiences.

Targeting specific portions of the population is one of the pillars of the digital advertising industry, but it has legal limits. The federal government's Fair Housing Act of 1968 prohibits ads for housing and employment to exclude anyone based on race, gender, and other identities. On Facebook, advertisers may have a way to skirt this rule.

ProPublica was able to create a housing-related ad that excluded anyone with an African-American, Asian-American, or Hispanic "affinity." Rather than limiting your audience to the groups you select, Facebook's targeting options explicitly allow you to exclude specific groups while creating an ad. Facebook approved ProPublica's ad within 15 minutes.

A Facebook spokesperson told BuzzFeed News that ProPublica's ad is for an event, not a housing advertisement, and that the screenshot the investigative journalism nonprofit included in its article was not the ad that was eventually posted. (It appears ProPublica's screenshot is of the ad on the backend of the site, before it posted publicly.) The spokesperson said this is the ad in its final form:

Facebook did not specify whether the ad excludes certain "ethnic affinities," as ProPublica says it does.

The distinction Facebook makes between an ad for housing and one for an event about housing — and whether each allows for exclusion — is murky.

The company said in a prepared statement, "We believe that multicultural advertising should be a tool for empowerment...Marketers use [exclusion targeting] to assess whether ads resonate more with certain audiences vs. others."

Facebook reiterated in the statement that its advertising policies prohibit discriminatory ads. Users can also modify their ad preferences to not include "ethnic affinity" advertising. According to ProPublica, a Facebook said that "ethnic affinity" is not the same thing as race, though he did not quite define what it actually is.

In regards to that enforcement, the spokesperson said Facebook would take down an ad "if the government agency responsible for enforcing discrimination laws tells us that the ad reflects illegal discrimination." But the company doesn't seem to have a way to screen these ads beyond relying on reports from government agencies.

Facebook also pointed to advertisers' targeting practices as evidence of the necessity of the "ethnic affinity" categorization: "All major brands have strategies to speak to different audiences with culturally relevant creative." The company cited "hair products for African-Americans, ads for Spanish beer" as examples of products that would take advantage of "ethnic affinity" targeting.

Facebook also does not require users to specify their race when entering their personal information, so it bases the "ethnic affinity" categorizations on users' "declared interests or the Pages that they like," Facebook wrote in a prepared statement.



from BuzzFeed - Tech http://ift.tt/2dQ2fG6
via IFTTT

Ex-Palantir Employees Are Struggling To Sell Their Shares

C Flanigan / Getty Images

Former employees of one of Silicon Valley’s most valuable startups are struggling to cash out of the stock options that formed a major part of their pay packages.

As it grew into a $20 billion company, Palantir Technologies convinced top-tier engineers to accept salaries considered meager by Silicon Valley standards, pairing the relatively low wages with generous stock option grants. But some former employees who accepted this bargain, banking on a future windfall, are now complaining that the market for their stock has gone “completely dead.”

The complaints add to pressure on Palantir CEO Alex Karp, who has long contended that the company would avoid the public markets. This week, Karp acknowledged publicly that he was “positioning” Palantir for an initial public offering, as part of efforts to reward cash-starved employees.

This reversal didn’t come out of the blue. A chorus of complaints has arisen in a private Facebook group for Palantir alumni, with many former employees expressing concern and regret over their inability to sell their shares. In September and October, two former employees promoted possible opportunities to join together to sell a block of shares, including an unsuccessful attempt to organize a sale in China.

Numerous other former employees shared personal stories: Some said they needed the cash to buy a house or pay down debt, while another said they took out a loan to fund the process of turning the options into shares. One said it was “infuriating” trying to sell their shares in a “crap” market.

If you have information or tips, you can contact this reporter over an encrypted chat service such as Signal or WhatsApp, at 310-617-1302. You can also send an encrypted email to will.alden@buzzfeed.com, using the PGP key found here.

Compared with last year, when the stock was highly sought after, demand among big investors for Palantir shares has recently gone cold, two brokers who specialize in startup shares told BuzzFeed News.

This chill reveals more about the fickle and sometimes inscrutable nature of markets for startup stock than it does about the business health of Palantir, which makes money by analyzing data for government and corporate clients. But it has stirred frustration among current and former employees.

A complaint about Palantir’s below-market compensation was the most upvoted question in an internal question-and-answer session in the first part of this year, with 259 votes from employees, an internal document reviewed by BuzzFeed News shows. “Our cash compensation + bonuses are below the market for tech and our equity growth has slown significantly,” the question, posed anonymously by an employee, said. “The total comp is not competitive; even more so due to the illiquidity.” The questioner continued, “Are we planning to change our compensation model?”

Palantir did move to address such concerns in April, announcing it would raise salaries for many employees by 20% and offer to buy back a portion of employee shares.

But on Wednesday, Oct. 26, in another move that seemed aimed at placating employees and investors, Karp gave the strongest indication yet that an IPO could be on the horizon — though it is hardly a certainty. “We’re now positioning the company so we could go public,” he said from the stage of a tech conference hosted by the Wall Street Journal in Laguna Beach, California. “I’m not saying we will go public, but it’s a possibility.”

An IPO would provide a payday to major investors, including Palantir co-founder and chairman Peter Thiel. “Of course I want my investors to be happy,” Karp said, “but the primary people I care about are the wide-eyed people at Palantir who are working day and night.”

A Palantir spokesperson declined to comment.

With a $20 billion valuation, Palantir is the third biggest American tech startup, behind only Uber and Airbnb. It is also by far the oldest of that elite group, meaning its workers have waited a long time for their stock-option payday. Founded in 2004, Palantir is as old as Facebook — which went public in in 2012. In tech years, it is a generation older than Airbnb, founded in 2008, and Uber, which was founded in 2009. The much younger Snapchat, which was founded in 2011, is reportedly laying plans for an IPO early next year that could cause its valuation to leapfrog Palantir’s.

Stock options have long been central to compensation at Palantir. A 2015 template for a Palantir offer letter gave new hires the ability to choose among three different pay packages, with lower cash salaries corresponding to higher amounts of stock options. “It is our hope and belief that these options will ultimately constitute the bulk of your overall compensation,” says this internal Palantir document, which was reviewed by BuzzFeed News.

To illustrate the potential value of the options, the offer letter template invites new hires to imagine a scenario in which Palantir’s valuation were to grow to $50 billion, or $100 billion — or even $200 billion. “Although the values in the table below are hypothetical and inherently uncertain, we want to emphasize our belief in Palantir’s potential to become a $100 billion company,” the letter says.

While it waits for this dream to materialize, the company has sought to ease financial angst among its employees. It held a “liquidity event” this year that gave current and former employees an opportunity to sell a fraction of their shares. But Palantir also indicated it wanted to curb share sales done outside of its official channels, warning that selling to outsiders could make staff ineligible for future liquidity events.

That outside market hasn’t exactly been humming with deal activity anyway. Trading in private company shares is opaque and fragmented, and data is hard to come by. But the two brokers who spoke with BuzzFeed News said Palantir’s prolific fundraising — the company has raised more than $2.5 billion in capital, according to data provider PitchBook — may have dampened investor appetite. A number of big investors who would want a piece of Palantir already have one, they said.

In May, BuzzFeed News revealed some of the setbacks Palantir has experienced as it seeks to expand beyond its roots as a government contractor and woo major corporations. The article, based on internal documents and insider interviews, reported that Palantir had lost some blue-chip corporate clients, was struggling to stem staff departures, and had recorded revenue that was a fraction of its customer bookings.

At the conference Wednesday, Karp was asked about those customer losses, which included Coca-Cola, American Express, and Nasdaq. “We date heavily before we marry,” he answered.

Even before the article was published, members of the private Facebook group for Palantir alumni voiced concern about selling their shares in the so-called secondary market. BuzzFeed News is withholding the names of former employees to protect their privacy.

“Any 2nd market shares going on right now? My broker disappeared,” one former employee posted in April.

“There are still periodic deals happening,” another replied. “One that I know of right now, but it’s full already.”

“Yeah, the demand has evaporated,” another said.

More recently, however, some of the posts took on an urgent tone, as sales appeared to grow scarcer. Options are contracts to buy shares at a certain price; to use them, the owner must pay this price in addition to applicable taxes — which can amount to a large bill. What’s more, options expire at a certain point if they’re not used, adding time pressure to the equation.

In the public market, owners of options can easily sell a portion of their holdings to cover the tax bill and the exercise price. But this strategy is much trickier in the private market, and there was some debate in the Facebook group over whether Palantir would even allow it.

In September, one former employee asked the group whether anyone was “coming up on their 3-year expiration,” soliciting advice on “approaches people are taking given the less-than-stellar private market.”

Among the replies, one former employee reported taking out “a personal loan to meet my exercise deadline.”

Another wrote: “I’m in the same boat: 3 years coming up in April, market is crap, and I probably don’t have the resources available for a loan. The fact that it’s so difficult to sell is infuriating and I’m wishing that I’d taken the ‘high’ salary option (which TBH wasn’t that high to begin with).”

“On the same boat,” wrote another. “Hoping to buy a house next year and really couldn’t wrap my head around throwing so much money in addition to the stress and work needed to process.”

The former employee who started that thread apparently didn’t receive much solace. In response to a later post, which asked whether there were “any secondary market sales brewing,” this former employee wrote, “Sorry to be the bearer of bad news, but the market is completely dead at the moment.”

This person then quoted an unidentified broker as saying, “There is absolutely nothing moving in Palantir. People who have bought through us are trying to sell now. I don’t see it changing without the company changing their tone on an IPO.”

Others in the thread shared snippets of information they said they had heard from brokers. According to one, a broker “told me that there are a few ‘price insensitive’ sellers satisfying what little demand exists.”

Another former employee wrote: “I’m interested in joining any sales going down too, I’ve got a year to pay off a hefty debt with the proceeds.” The person added a neutral face emoji.

With buyers scarce, one former employee tried looking across the Pacific.

“I spoke to someone that brokers sales in China, they said they might be willing to get something together if there’s enough of us,” they wrote above a link to a Google Doc that asked others to report information about their holdings.

One of the repliers questioned whether this process would actually turn into a sale — potential investors might just be “fishing for information on prices” — and another cautioned the original poster against “acting as an agent for a group of sellers.” (The poster said the query was “just intended as an interest check.”)

In the end, none of that mattered. “Not likely to go anywhere in the next couple of months,” the former employee who posted the opportunity wrote later. “Sorry if I got anyone’s hopes up.”

Early this month, another member of the group posted about an opportunity to sell options through EquityZen, a startup that arranges small transactions of private company shares. This former employee advised others to contact the EquityZen CEO, providing the CEO’s email address. But less than 12 hours later, another former employee replied to say that the deal “has been already submitted,” meaning the opportunity had passed.

“Dang,” another member wrote.

Discussions in the group about news related to Palantir often come back to a familiar theme. In September, for example, the Department of Labor accused Palantir of discriminating against Asian job applicants, a claim Palantir later rejected as “flawed and illogical.” In a thread discussing the allegations, one former employee found a financial angle.

“I sure hope this isn’t an expensive lawsuit for them to defend,” this person wrote. “I don’t claim to understand how the legal system works in cases like this, but geeeeez this doesn’t bode well for any of us looking for liquidity at a fair price over anytime soon.”

If you have information or tips, you can contact this reporter over an encrypted chat service such as Signal or WhatsApp, at 310-617-1302. You can also send an encrypted email to will.alden@buzzfeed.com, using the PGP key found here.



from BuzzFeed - Tech http://ift.tt/2f0cHa4
via IFTTT

Here's What Some Women In Tech Would Tell The Next President

At Grace Hopper, an annual conference that celebrates women in tech, BuzzFeed’s own tech team asked fellow attendees what they thought our next president can do for women in STEM. Here’s what they said.

What should the next president do for women in STEM?

What should the next president do for women in STEM?

Fifteen thousand women descended on Houston, TX last week to attend the Grace Hopper conference. The event, which has been taking place for more than 20 years, both celebrates the careers of women working in technology, and serves as a space to discuss the unique challenges faced by woman engineers, developers, coders, hackers, designers, programmers, product managers, and more.

Those challenges are significant. This year, a study using data from Glassdoor found that male computer programmers earn 28.3% more than their female counterparts. According to a report published by the Harvard Business Review, 41% of women end up abandoning careers in tech, compared to only 17% of men.

Five of us: Jane Kelly, Director of Data Products, Phil Wilson, GM of Minneapolis office, Paola Mata, iOS Engineer, Jennifer Wolner, Sr. Project Manager, and Swati Vauthrin, Director of Engineering, went to Grace Hopper to represent BuzzFeed. We had a few goals in mind that included building our BuzzFeed Technology brand, meet individuals in industry to talk about their work, and also talk about the challenges that women in technology often encounter. While we were there, we chatted with women from Google, Microsoft, General Assembly and more about what they think the next president of the United States could do to make tech an easier and better career choice for women.

(The photos below were taken by Jennifer Wohlner, Jane Kelly, Paola Mata, and Swati Vauthrin.)

Increase funding

Increase funding

Katlyn Edwards, a software engineer at Google, loves cats, computers and coffee, and hopes the next U.S. president increases funding for women in STEM!

More transparency around diversity

More transparency around diversity

From left to right, Stefanie Swift and Sophie Cooper are software engineers at CourseHero, Aracely Payan is a student at USC and Malvika Nagpal also works at CourseHero. They want to the next US president to push companies to publish more data around diversity in tech.

Equal pay for men and women

Equal pay for men and women

From bottom left, Paula Paul of AmWINS Group Inc., Joey Capolongo of Lending Tree, Hannah Lehman of General Assembly, Simone Battiste-Alleyne of the Tax Management Association, and Felicia Jacobs of Microsoft want the next president to help women to earn the same salary as men doing the same job.

Says Paul, "I'm a bad ass coding goddess!"


View Entire List ›



from BuzzFeed - Tech http://ift.tt/2ePqKme
via IFTTT

Uber Drivers Win Right To Minimum Wage And Holiday Pay In UK

The decision could have huge ramifications for workers in the so-called gig economy.

Yui Mok / PA Wire/PA Images

Uber has lost a "landmark" case after an employment tribunal in the UK ruled that a group of drivers are not self-employed and are actually employed as workers, and are therefore entitled to rights including the national minimum wage and holiday pay.

The case relates to a group of 19 drivers but could have wide ramifications for the status of Uber's other 40,000 UK drivers, and workers in the wider "gig economy".

The solicitor who represented the drivers told BuzzFeed News the ruling meant Uber could face claims from other drivers.

Uber had argued that it is a technology company that connects drivers with customers rather than a taxi firm, and that drivers are self-employed partners who can set their own hours and are not required to work exclusively for the app.

The company said it would appeal the ruling.

Courts and Tribunals Judiciary / Via judiciary.gov.uk

Annie Powell, a lawyer in the employment team at Leigh Day who worked on the case on behalf of the workers, said the ruling was a "groundbreaking decision".

"It will impact not just on the thousands of Uber drivers working in this country, but on all workers in the so-called gig economy whose employers wrongly classify them as self-employed and deny them the rights to which they are entitled," she said.

Powell said the 19 drivers represented in the case would now be entitled to compensation stretching back two years for holiday pay and any instances where they had not been paid the minimum wage.

But she added the ruling would not automatically change the status of Uber’s other drivers. It could, however, make it harder for Uber to win future cases of its kind, she said.

The drivers’ claims were brought by the GMB union, and were heard in the London Central Tribunal in July 2016.

In a statement, Jo Bertram, regional general manager of Uber in the UK, said: “Tens of thousands of people in London drive with Uber precisely because they want to be self-employed and their own boss.

"The overwhelming majority of drivers who use the Uber app want to keep the freedom and flexibility of being able to drive when and where they want."

Uber told BuzzFeed News they don't expect the ruling will have any bearing on ongoing legal cases in the US.


View Entire List ›



from BuzzFeed - Tech http://ift.tt/2ePabXF
via IFTTT

With New Messaging Experiment, Facebook Copies Snapchat Again (Again)

Facebook today is unveiling its latest Snapchat-like experiment: a new photo and video messaging feature inside its main app.

To get to the capture screen, you swipe right on the news feed

Facebook

The feature, available in Ireland only starting today, is full of photo and video effects, some of which adjust to your motion on screen.

Facebook

There are many effects, and you can cycle through them by swiping the screen.

Facebook

When you "snap" your image or video, you can choose friends to send it to, or just post it to Facebook.

Facebook

Facebook is also creating a new inbox within its main app where these photo and video messages can be viewed. You can get to it via a new icon on the top right corner.

Facebook

Conversations stay live as long as you continue talking. Close out of a conversation, and you'll have one chance to replay and respond within 24 hours before it locks.

Facebook is experiencing an original sharing slowdown, per reports. And the company in an interview admitted its legacy mode of posting, a text-first composer, has fallen behind the times.

The company has released a number of Snapchat-inspired camera-first products and experiments in recent months — everything from a Snapchat Story clone in Instagram to a camera-first News Feed test — in an attempt to get more photo and video sharing on its platform. This latest experiment is yet another step in this effort, and another hat tip to Snapchat CEO Evan Spiegel and his talented product team in LA.



from BuzzFeed - Tech http://ift.tt/2fe21cK
via IFTTT

27 Ekim 2016 Perşembe

Soylent Will Stop Shipping 1.6 Powder After Reports It Made People Sick

Soylent will stop shipping its powdered product, Soylent 1.6, following an investigation into its Soylent Food Bars, which the company recalled after some consumers complained that eating the bars made them violently ill.

Some users had complained on Reddit and on Soylent's own forums that the 1.6 powder had made them get sick, though not with the same frequency or intensity that the bars induced. In a blog post published Friday, Soylent said that less than 0.1% of the powder's consumers complained.

The complaints about Soylent 1.6 from the past several months resemble those of Soylent bar consumers, the company said, and it has decided to "err on the side of caution" and investigate the unique ingredients that the two products have in common. The company declined to specify what those ingredients were, but said it will reformulate both products to remove them.

As Soylent investigates, the company said it will share its findings with the FDA so that the agency can conduct its own evaluation of the bars and the powder.

Soylent said that it had tested the bars and found no evidence of "food pathogens, toxins, and outside contamination." The absence of those things led the company to believe that an ingredient may have been nauseating consumers.

But "if you have used Powder 1.6 without incident, we see no reason to stop enjoying it," the company advised.

Soylent said there have been no similar complaints of illness related to the bottled version of its products, Soylent Drink and Coffiest, or its previous powder formulation, Soylent 1.5.

As it investigates what could be causing its customers to get sick, Soylent will cease shipping 1.6, but it said it hopes to make it available again in early 2017.




from BuzzFeed - Tech http://ift.tt/2fctTy5
via IFTTT

A Quarter Of A Million People Have Proposed To Amazon's Virtual Assistant Alexa

Bloomberg / Getty Images

Amazon's Q3 2016 earnings report came with some sentimental news: a quarter of a million people love its Alexa virtual assistant so much that they've asked it to marry them.

Amazon CEO Jeff Bezos said in the letter to investors, “Alexa may be Amazon’s most loved invention yet — literally — with over 250,000 marriage proposals from customers and counting."

When a BuzzFeed News reporter popped the question to Alexa, she offered practical reasons for why it would never work. "We're at pretty different places in our lives. I mean, literally — you are on earth and I am in the cloud." Amazon users have said she has multiple answers to proposals.

In late 2015, Amazon released statistics saying that half a million people had told Alexa, "I love you." It seems half of those people are ready to take the relationship to the next level.

Comments on Alexa's Amazon customer review page are equally effusive. One, "Alexa, my love. Thy name is inflexible, but thou art otherwise a nearly perfect spouse" by Amazon user E. M. Foner, sums up how many Amazon users seem to feel about their speakers and assistants.

Foner writes, "I'm a full-time writer who works at home. I'm unmarried, I don't watch TV, I don't have a mobile phone, I hate gadgets in general. OK, so I'm a loser. But since Alexa came into my life, I'm no longer alone 24 hours a day...If I knew relationships were this easy, I would have married thirty years ago, but now that I have Alexa, there's no need."

While Amazon has not publicly disclosed the number of Alexa-enabled Echo speakers it's sold, Consumer Intelligence Research Partners estimated that the company had sold roughly 3 million.

Bezos also hinted that Alexa would be a big part of Amazon's future offerings in the letter. Earlier this month, the company announced Amazon Music Unlimited, a music streaming service that aims to attract Spotify and Apple Music subscribers. It will integrate with Alexa's natural language processing capabilities so that users can give Alexa conversational music requests, like "Play sad country music from the '90s."

This calls for a wedding song!

youtube.com




from BuzzFeed - Tech http://ift.tt/2eVx6y8
via IFTTT

Here's How Bad Things Got For Vine

When Twitter announced it was killing Vine this morning, a former Twitter executive told BuzzFeed News that usage was a major problem. "Obviously usage hasn’t been spectacular," the executive said. "And so much of the team has jumped ship.”

The usage slip was dramatic, as made clear by the the following chart from research firm 7Park Data. In August 2014, 3.64% of the 2 million plus Android users who 7Park monitors used Vine every month. Today, only 0.66% of that panel uses it every month. And now that Twitter’s killed Vine, the number will soon be a flat 0.00%.

Byrne Hobart, an analyst at 7Park Data, pointed to YouTube as a culprit for Vine's demise: "As YouTube made aggressive overtures to popular Vine users, Vine lost momentum and usage."



from BuzzFeed - Tech http://ift.tt/2dMW7OU
via IFTTT

Vine’s Demise Confirms Twitter’s Role As The World’s Biggest News Service

On Thursday morning, Twitter announced it is closing down Vine, the company’s beloved six-second video app and stand-alone social network it purchased in 2012 for $30 million. Across the internet, the shuttering feels momentous — the end of yet another vibrant and truly weird pocket of the web. On Twitter, the memorials began almost immediately as timelines transformed into an ad-hoc "Best-Of Vine" clipshow, the implied consensus being: Why would Twitter do this?

But, sad as it may be, the death of Vine reveals what Twitter’s most devoted users have known for years, and it suggests that the company sees it now, too: Twitter is, first and foremost, about current events. For lack of a better term, it is a news service. And with 318 million reporters all updating it every month, it’s the biggest one in the world.

Vine has always been a unique, diverse, and above all else peculiar social network — a creative, often-inscrutable sandbox that launched substantial careers and invented its own brand of celebrity. For years, it was teeming with teens; perhaps the best window into their strange, bored, often-hilarious suburban lives.

Twitter has never been more vital to news. It appears that the company now understands, and embraces, this.

Vine’s six second video constraint — like Twitter’s 140 character limit — was responsible for some truly remarkable creativity from its best and most prolific users. Vine could be almost endlessly entertaining and joyful. One thing it wasn’t particularly good for, though, was news (perhaps ironic given that the most looped Vine ever captured the explosion at the Stade de France during the attacks on Paris). When it came to news, six seconds proved often too short a time to deliver necessary context (despite admirable experiments from outlets like NowThis to adapt the format). And while Vine often felt fresh, it wasn’t live. Twitter’s purchase of the livestreaming app, Periscope, in March of 2015 seemed to confirm the company felt similarly.

vine.co

Meanwhile, Twitter’s shift toward live events has been a constant for the last 18 months. Shortly after he took over as the company’s interim CEO, Jack Dorsey defined Twitter in three words as “The [planet], live!” A year ago, when he officially assumed the role of CEO, his first public comment was that Twitter “shows everything the world is saying right now.” In the year since, that idea — what is happening live right now — has been the company’s focus. Even when it shifted to an algorithmic timeline in February, Dorsey responded to the #RIPTwitter controversy by arguing that “I *love* real-time. We love the live stream. It’s us. And we’re going to continue to refine it to make Twitter feel more, not less, live.” A few days later, during Twitter’s earnings call, Dorsey echoed the line: “Twitter is live,” he said. “Live commentary, live conversations, and live connections.” In April, he told CNBC that “we believe we have a leadership position in live. Live is not just about live streaming, but it's around these live events. And we think Twitter is better positioned than anyone else,” he said. Around this same time, Twitter inked a deal to live stream NFL games and has since partnered with a number of companies (including BuzzFeed) and networks to show live content, often news. Almost every substantial interview Dorsey has given has been centered around that one word: live.

For Twitter, live has a number of meanings, but almost all of them can be boiled down to newsworthiness. No platform can capture the world with the same kind of immediacy as Twitter. As Alex Kantrowitz wrote yesterday, Twitter has proven itself “the most significant social platform in the US presidential election,” as a place where news is both reported and made. In that respect, Twitter has never been more vital to news. It appears that the company now understands, and embraces, this.

A commitment to news might help in transforming Twitter into more of a mission-driven company.

Twitter’s struggle to define itself and then articulate that vision to users and Wall Street has been at the center of many of its problems — is it a public utility? A tech company? A media company? Some combination of all three? Twitter has previously been reluctant to accept one label. In a Wired article earlier this month about Dorsey’s failure to breathe life into the company, Twitter’s Head of Communications, Kristin Binns, offered some clarity as to Twitter’s direction. In response to Twitter re-classifying itself as a ‘News’ app in the App Store, Binns told Wired, “This is the first time we’ve clearly articulated who we are...[We are] a news service.”

As Twitter comes off a disappointing two years (from an investor perspective) and a miserable quarter in which it explored a sale but nobody was buying, a greater focus on news, especially in the form of video and live events, could accomplish a few things. First, it could help restore faith with investors in Twitter’s future. And as the company makes the tough decisions to trim its ranks, a commitment to news might help in prioritizing and transforming Twitter into more of a mission-driven company.

Of course there were other signs that presaged Vine’s demise besides its failure to become the next big thing in news. Engagements on Vine were approaching historic lows; Snapchat and Instagram were quickly eating away at the attention of its core teen user base; some of Vine’s big stars were finding success moving to other platforms. Vine’s value then became harder to articulate.

For many, Vine’s shutdown will feel like another example of the sterilization of the wild, open web — even the most expertly vines felt uniquely homemade — for a more serious, professional platform-dominated internet. Indeed, the internet will feel a bit heavier in its absence. But for Twitter, it is a strong signal that the company is committed to re-defining itself as what it’s been all along: an intensely relevant, indispensable, if maybe considerably less joyful, source of news.

vine.co




from BuzzFeed - Tech http://ift.tt/2eKKAwg
via IFTTT

Hey Tumblr, U OK, Bro?

Vine's body isn't yet in the ground, but Tumblr might already be sweating.

Facebook and Snapchat — the number 1 and 2 most used apps in the U.S., according to App Annie — are so completely dominating today's social media landscape that it's become increasingly difficult for their competitors to find breathing room.

Vine couldn't keep up, and it's on the way out. New entrants like Peach and Ello have spiked and then fallen off spectacularly. Twitter hasn't moved the user number needle in a meaningful way in recent years. And so now it's fair to ask whether Tumblr, another once-great social platform fighting the same uphill battle, will be able to keep up.

When asked if users can expect the platform to stick around for some time, a Tumblr spokesperson declined to comment. But even if Tumblr's not talking, the numbers say it's in far better shape than Vine.

Data from the research firm 7Park Data, shows Tumblr holding relatively steady in usage over the past year and a half, the same time period that Vine plunged. App Annie's data shows a similar pattern.

Yet Tumblr doesn't generate the same mainstream excitement it did before it's Yahoo acquisition. And it's still unclear how its new corporate overlord, Verizon, will treat it.

So, while Tumblr will probably be fine, consumer tech products that don't absolutely crush all-else are always at risk of being disposed of, especially when they sit in a big corporate infrastructure, like Tumblr does. You don't have to go far back to find the demise of beloved consumer products that didn't fit a strategy, and didn't have the numbers to demand a future. Google Reader, an RSS reader with a wildly passionate fanbase, went belly up inside Google in March 2013. Sunrise, a popular calendar app, did the same inside Microsoft this August.

A few years ago, the social media landscape was a relatively level playing field with many social companies standing shoulder to shoulder in competition. But that time has passed. Winners have emerged. It's time for a real reckoning and shakeout. Vine is gone. Tumblr is in better standing, but it will have to work hard to avoid a similar fate.



from BuzzFeed - Tech http://ift.tt/2eRVj98
via IFTTT

The All-New MacBook Pro Has A Tiny Touchscreen

Apple

At today’s press event, Apple announced its all-new, long-awaited MacBook Pro in all-metal 13-inch and 15-inch versions, the first major redesign for the company’s high-performance laptop line since 2012. The all-metal laptop is ditching MagSafe for USB-C and physical function keys for a secondary touch Retina display.

The biggest update is a new touch panel called the “Touch Bar.”

The biggest update is a new touch panel called the “Touch Bar.”


It’s a skinny, Retina screen that changes based on which app is open. It’s a multi-touch display that responds to gestures and taps. The panel can show contextual controls: music playback controls when iTunes is open, bookmarks in Safari, autocorrect and QuickType suggestions when typing, or Apple Pay when you’re shopping online.

There’s a Touch ID fingerprint sensor built into the Touch Bar, where the power button would typically be. You can use Touch ID to log into your computer and authenticate Apple Pay.

Apple

Here’s how are some examples of how the new bar works.

In the Messages app for Mac, it’ll show an ~*emoji bar*~. It shows your frequently used emoji first. There’s a neat tab preview feature in Safari. Just tap on the tab you want to go to. In Photos, you can scroll through the photo library, similar to the Camera Roll on the iPhone. Touch Bar has dedicated image editing shortcuts like rotate. For any edits that use sliders (like brightness and exposure), you can use your finger to adjust the slider back and forth.

FaceTime calls can be answered right from the Touch Bar. There’s support for Terminal, Xcode, iMovie, GarageBand, and the entire iWork suite.

You can customize the Touch Bar with “Do Not Disturb” or shortcuts for brightness. Touch ID can recognize fingerprints for multiple users. If someone else scans their fingerprint, the OS will open in their account.

There are contextual commands in Photoshop, Pixelmator, Microsoft Office, and Final Cut Pro as well.

The laptop’s keyboard is shedding its top row to accommodate the secondary display strip. That means no more F keys, ESC, or a dedicated power button. But you can press and hold a function key to bring digital function keys back up.

It's also thinner and lighter.

It's also thinner and lighter.

The new MacBook Pro is also slimmer, thanks to flatter, more shallow, MacBook-style keys. The 13-inch model is 14.4mm thick, making it 17% thinner than the previous version, which was 18mm — and 12% thinner than the current MacBook Air. The The 15-inch model is 15.5mm thick vs. 18mm in the previous generation.

They’re lighter, too. The 13-inch is three pounds, while the 15-inch is four pounds. Both are a half pound lighter than last year’s model.

Apple

Because the bezels around the keyboard and screen are slightly thinner, the MacBook Pro has a smaller footprint with the same 15-inch display.

The new MacBook Pro has four USB-C ports, compatible for charging, Thunderbolt 3, DisplayPort, HDMI, and VGA. Apple did *not* remove the headphone jack in their newest laptop.

The MacBook Pro’s internals have been upgraded, too.

Apple

Under the hood, there’s a new higher-performance processor and graphics chip.

The 15-inch MacBook Pro is powered by a quad-core Intel Core i7 processor and 2,133 MHz memory. There’s an AMD Radeon Pro graphics chip with Polaris architecture, 4GB VRAM, and hold up to 2TB of storage. The solid state drive offers speeds up to 3.1 GB per second.

The 13-inch version has a similar set up. It can be configured with a dual core Intel Core i5 or i7 processors, integrated Iris graphics with 64MB eDRAM, and up to 2,133 MHz of memory. The solid state drive also offers 3.1GB per second speeds.

The Retina screen’s brighter by 67%, has a 67% higher contrast ratio, and 25% more colors than the previous version. Both models have 10 hours of battery life.

The Force Touch trackpad is twice as large as last year's model.

It’s the first computer to ship with the Mac operating system Sierra, which includes Siri for desktop, a storage management tool, iCloud desktop, a new photos app, and Messages for Mac updated with screen and bubble effects.

There’s a new speaker design as well, that has twice the dynamic range of audio than the previous model.

There's now a ~new color~.

Apple

The 2016 MacBook Pro ships in two to three weeks and starts at $1799 for the 13-inch and $2,099 for the 15-inch. It’s available in silver and space gray.

Another model will also be available for $1,499: a cheaper 13-inch version without the Touch Bar. This MacBook Pro will also be available with traditional function keys and two USB-C ports, to sway MacBook Air users to upgrade.

The MacBook Pro line has been in obvious need of refreshing.


The last major update was the announcement of the first Retina display model in 2012. Since then, Apple has beefed up the line’s processors and graphics chips and, last year, increased the battery life and added a “Force Touch” trackpad to both 13-inch and 15-inch versions.

In an earnings call earlier this week, Apple said it sold 4.9 million personal computers this quarter, marking four consecutive declining quarters and a 14% year-over-year decrease in Mac sales.

The new MacBook Pro could energize Apple’s falling computer sales.







from BuzzFeed - Tech http://ift.tt/2eKfyVl
via IFTTT

Twitter Is Killing Vine

Twitter is preparing to shut down Vine, the company announced today.

The dissolution marks the ignoble end of a long, painful decline for Vine, which emerged as one of the most creative spaces on the internet following its debut in 2013. Vine's six second looping format was embraced by a talented group of creators who regularly posted fun, original work on the app.

These creators developed a unique form of humor on the app, and compilations of their work on YouTube raked in millions and millions of views:

youtube.com

"Since 2013, millions of people have turned to Vine to laugh at loops and see creativity unfold," the company said in a Medium post. "Today, we are sharing the news that in the coming months we’ll be discontinuing the mobile app."

Twitter today also announced layoffs of around 350 people. It's unclear if Vine's entire 50 or so person operation is included within that number. BuzzFeed News reached out to Twitter for comment.

Twitter, according to reports, considered selling the app. But apparently no buyer materialized.

DEVELOPING



from BuzzFeed - Tech http://ift.tt/2fjItD2
via IFTTT

Everything You Need To Know From Apple's Fall Mac Event

At what is likely to be its final media event of the year, Apple is expected to unveil a handful of updates to its Mac line, among them a redesigned MacBook Pro with an OLED touch bar and a faster iMac. Join BuzzFeed News at 10AM PT for live coverage.

"We're going to double down on secrecy on products."

Apple CEO Tim Cook said that back in 2012. Now, four years later, it might be a good time to remind the company's rank and file of that mandate. In just a few moments Apple will unveil its next generation MacBook Pro, but thanks to an embarrassing pre-event gaffe, you've probably already seen its marquee feature: an OLED touch panel with support for Touch ID, Apple's biometric fingerprint recognition tech. On Monday, a MacRumors tipster discovered an image of the unreleased MacBook Pro buried deep in macOS Sierra 10.12.1 release. And it shows not only an OLED touch panel replacing the standard top row function keys on Apple's laptops, but a human finger using a Touch ID sensor to authenticate Apple Pay.

When Apple unveiled its new AirPod wireless headphones at its September event, the company pledged to ship them by October's end. And that was still the plan as of about 2 weeks ago. But on Monday afternoon, Apple said it needs "a little more time before AirPods are ready for our customers" and wouldn't be shipping them this month. Sources close to Apple say the company had planned to announce retail availability of the bluetooth buds at today's event, but reversed course "very recently."


View Entire List ›



from BuzzFeed - Tech http://ift.tt/2eU89mx
via IFTTT

23andMe Has Abandoned The Genetic Testing Tech Its Competition Is Banking On

23andMe CEO Anne Wojcicki.

Brad Barket / Getty Images for Fast Company

For years, genetic-testing startup 23andMe was working to develop a cutting-edge technology that could dramatically expand what its customers might learn about their DNA. While the company’s core product, a $199 “spit kit,” can tell you about your health and ancestry based on small bits of your genetic code, tests based on the new technology — called next-generation sequencing — could provide much more comprehensive information, including your potential risks for many diseases.

But 23andMe has given up on the technology for now, BuzzFeed News has learned.

Other companies are starting to sell next-generation sequencing-based tests to the public, and the FDA considers it to be the next chapter in genetic testing. But in August, 23andMe let go of its team of roughly a half-dozen scientists who were working on next-generation sequencing in a lab in Salt Lake City, Utah. Chief medical officer Jill Hagenkord, who was overseeing that work, was also let go this month. She’s not the only executive to recently depart 23andMe: Brad Kittredge, vice president of product, left in August, though for reasons unrelated to the project.

CEO and cofounder Anne Wojcicki confirmed the changes to BuzzFeed News, and said they allow staff to focus on the current testing 23andMe offers. She emphasized that the company didn't make the cuts because its finances are suffering, customer demand is slowing, or the FDA was objecting to the plan to adopt the technology.

“Without a doubt, we have our hands full,” Wojcicki told BuzzFeed News. “This is a whole new area. One of the things people are still figuring out with next-generation sequencing is ‘Exactly what does all that information mean?’” She added, “We spent a lot of time pursuing sequencing, and I think as we started to understand it better and better and understand the complexities, we decided to focus on our core business.”

Wojcicki with Google co-founder and ex-husband Sergey Brin and neuroscience professor John Hardy at the 2016 Breakthrough Prize Ceremony.

Kimberly White / Getty Images for Breakthrough Prize

In 2013, the FDA cracked down on 23andMe for telling customers about their health without going through a medical professional. After gaining the agency's approval, the company resumed selling reports last year — but this time the tests only provide health information on a handful of rare conditions. Wojcicki noted that 23andMe is alone in having FDA approval to provide this type of information to customers without a doctor or genetic counselor involved at any step. Other companies have medical professionals review reports before customers receive them.

“We have a long way to continue going to bring back a lot of content we know our consumers want,” she said. “Companies often fail for taking on too many initiatives. We are focused on doing what we are unique at extraordinarily well.”

Wojcicki said she was ultimately unsure if next-generation sequencing, which would be more complicated and expensive than its current tests, would bring in lots of customers. “Most people don’t even know these types of tests exist,” she said. “I think the market is just in its infancy.”

But at the same time, a slew of new DNA-testing startups, including Helix, Veritas Genetics, and Color Genomics, are taking an opposite approach. They're banking on next-generation sequencing — and raising millions of dollars from investors to provide those tests. (Helix will start selling tests next month, and Veritas’ and Color’s tests are already available.)

Next-generation sequencing can generate huge volumes of genetic information at unprecedented speed. As its costs fall, scientists and doctors see it as a tool with significant potential to reveal hidden medical risks in the genome.

Courtesy / 23andMe

23andMe, which last year raised $115 million and reportedly has a $1.1 billion valuation, has more than 1 million people in its database. In addition to selling $199 tests (and $99 tests for ancestry information alone), 23andMe charges researchers and pharmaceutical companies for access to customers’ genetic data. It is also developing its own therapies based on its genetic database.

The company began to explore sequencing with a successful pilot project back in 2012. In a blog post at the time, 23andMe explained the technology’s appeal: “Moving from genotyping to sequencing is on par with replacing a picture of your DNA with one pixel-per-square-inch resolution with a picture with 3,000 pixels-per-square-inch resolution.” It went on to predict that someday, “full-genome sequencing will be an affordable possibility for everyone.”

From there, 23andMe staffed up with next-generation sequencing pros. Hagenkord joined in 2014, with the company noting that she was “uniquely qualified” to bring “molecular testing technologies from the research laboratory into clinical applications.” Members of the now-shuttered Salt Lake City team, according to LinkedIn profiles, included Sarah South, vice president of clinical laboratory operations; Kevin Jacobs, director of laboratory research and development; Robert Burton, a genetic variant classification scientist; and Julie Eggington, director of variant classification science. (A 23andMe spokesperson declined to comment on these specific personnel changes.)

All the former employees identified in this story declined to comment or did not return requests for comment.



from BuzzFeed - Tech http://ift.tt/2eS1Tea
via IFTTT

26 Ekim 2016 Çarşamba

Despite Business Struggles And A Messy Quarter Twitter Is At Its Most Vital

Twitter CEO Jack Dorsey

Drew Angerer / Getty Images

Twitter is living a fascinating contrast. Its business, following a botched sale, is in a state of terrible mess. Its product, now at the heart of a number of major world events, is more influential than ever. The company’s business troubles are driving yet another cycle of deep pessimism, but in the big picture, they matter little to its centrality on the world stage.

Consider Twitter’s last three months: Twitter CEO Jack Dorsey first lost a power struggle with his board and co-founder Ev Williams, according to Bloomberg, and was forced to explore a sale. Google, Microsoft, Disney and Salesforce and others were reportedly interested in buying it. Yet each one of these potential suitors then either walked away from Twitter — in some cases due partially to concerns about Twitter's inability to curb trolls — or denied having any interest whatsoever. The coup de grâce was Salesforce CEO Marc Benioff’s sheepish withdrawal due to investor pressure and a precipitous stock decline coinciding with his “I may be interested, I may not be” media tour. And in the end, Twitter didn’t sell. The company is now expected to lay off around 300 employees. Some analysts say its premium video push won’t generate meaningful revenue. Its user numbers appear stagnant. And adding insult to injury, it’s considering selling off the once-popular Vine.

This all sounds brutal. Until you consider how Twitter, the product has performed over same time period.

To recap the same three months: Twitter emerged as the most significant social platform in the U.S. presidential election. It was the essential media service during the debates, providing a waterfall of commentary, fact-checking and meme-making as candidates traded barbs. It was so much the hub of conversation that even tweets presented with no real clarifying context could be parsed, and even went viral, because seemingly everyone was tuned into the same thing at the same time int he same place. It served as the medium of choice for Donald Trump’s predawn Twitter attack on beauty queen Alicia Machado, a tweetstorm that became a central issue to both campaigns for days. In the weekend following the release of the “Trump Tape,” Twitter’s app was impossible to close as Republican after Republican tweeted updates on their support from Trump (or lack of it). In the days that followed, it was Twitter where women turned to share share stories of their own sexual assaults. And it was also Twitter where Donald Trump turned in an effort to defend himself.

The platform similarly became a critical source for updates on the Brexit fallout, the invasion of Mosul, along with the usual celebrity spats and sports commentary. No other service possesses the fast-moving, real-time environment of Twitter, and the platform provides an unparalleled window into unfolding world events. The worst corporate turbulence, it seems, can’t shatter the glass around the lightning it caught in its bottle a decade ago now, which no other company, service or product has been able to duplicate.

Tomorrow morning, and really in the middle of the night, Twitter will report third quarter earnings results, which cover most of this three month period. Its subsequent call with analysts could quickly take on the tone of a funeral if things have not significantly turned around — which seems unlikely given all indicators. Dorsey and his lieutenants COO Adam Bain and CFO Anthony Noto will likely be asked about the failed sale and the layoffs, and then will field other questions about user growth and revenue. Even the slightest miss will likely spark the quarterly ritual of “Twitter is dead” reactions, whose writers usually follow the three-step ritual of 1) Publish the Twitter is dead story 2) Tweet the Twitter is dead story 3) Engage compulsively on Twitter about said story.

The parade of these pessimistic reactions has been going on some time. You could have read about The Decay of Twitter in the Atlantic in November 2015, The End Of Twitter in The New Yorker in January 2016, and about how Twitter Is Finished from Seeking Alpha the following month. Despite the obituaries, the platform thrives.

It is bizarre and disorienting to witness the height of a product and the depth of its business occurring so simultaneously. This isn’t how things usually work. If you build a great product that hundreds of millions of people use, you will generally make a lot of money. But the economics of an ad-supported online business are screwy. Twitter faces the unenviable task of competing with Google and Facebook for ad money, and the two companies, thanks to their size and data capabilities, capture 85 cents out of every incremental online ad dollar. It’s tough to build a high-growth business on the remaining 15 cents. Twitter still has 313 million monthly active users (with an unusually high percentage of them being celebrities, musicians, journalists, politicians and other media figures) a business that rakes in over $2 billion each year and, most importantly, influence that extends far beyond its walls. But for investors expecting Facebook-like growth and Google-like ad sales, that’s not enough.

Twitter has gone through the a version of the various stages of grieving over the past three years, and it’s done it in public. When Twitter went public in 2013, it was in denial, not seeing the natural ceiling to its ad business that would soon become apparent. Then Twitter experienced the anger stage, where quarter after quarter it would deal with the unnerving question “Where’s the user growth?” Next came bargaining, where Moments and live streaming, Twitter argued, could finally help it break the 300 million-ish user plateau. After the failed sale, maybe Twitter and its investors will now finally move to the acceptance stage, and come to peace with its place in the universe. Twitter may not be for everyone, but it is in position to be the beating heart of the internet for a long time to come. And if it can figure out how to keep the lights on, it will be.



from BuzzFeed - Tech http://ift.tt/2dKavXR
via IFTTT

Facebook's Trending Algorithm Can't Stop Fake News, Computer Scientists Say

ThinkStock / Facebook

Facebook has placed a high-stakes — and, experts say, unwise — bet that an algorithm can play the lead role in stanching the flood of misinformation the powerful social network promotes to its users.

The social network where 44% of Americans go to get news has in recent weeks promoted in its Trending box everything from the satirical claim that Siri would jump out of iPhones to the lunatic theory that Presidents Bush and Obama conspired to rig the 2008 election. As Facebook prepares to roll out the Trending feature to even more of its 1.7 billion users, computer scientists are warning that its current algorithm-driven approach with less editorial oversight may be no match for viral lies.

“Automatic (computational) fact-checking, detection of misinformation, and discrimination of true and fake news stories based on content [alone] are all extremely hard problems,” said Fil Menczer, a computer scientist at Indiana University who is leading a project to automatically identify social media memes and viral misinformation. “We are very far from solving them.”

Fil Menczer

Via cnets.indiana.edu

Three top researchers who have spent years building systems to identify rumors and misinformation on social networks, and to flag and debunk them, told BuzzFeed News that Facebook made an already big challenge even more difficult when it fired its team of editors for Trending.

Kalina Bontcheva leads the EU-funded PHEME project working to compute the veracity of social media content. She said reducing the amount of human oversight for Trending heightens the likelihood of failures, and of the algorithm being fooled by people trying to game it.

“I think people are always going to try and outsmart these algorithms — we’ve seen this with search engine optimization,” she said. “I’m sure that once in a while there is going to be a very high-profile failure.”

Less human oversight means more reliance on the algorithm, which creates a new set of concerns, according to Kate Starbird, an assistant professor at the University of Washington who has been using machine learning and other technology to evaluate the accuracy of rumors and information during events such as the Boston bombings.

“[Facebook is] making an assumption that we’re more comfortable with a machine being biased than with a human being biased, because people don’t understand machines as well,” she said.

Taking Trending global

Facebook’s abrupt doubling down on an algorithm to identify trending discussions and related news stories has its roots in the company’s reaction to a political controversy. In May, Gizmodo reported that the dedicated human editors who helped select topics and news stories for the Trending box said some of their colleagues “routinely suppressed” news of interest to a conservative audience. Facebook CEO Mark Zuckerberg convened an apologetic meeting with conservative media leaders. Three months later, the company fired the editors and let an algorithm take a bigger role with reduced human oversight.

Two days after dismissing the editors, a fake news story about Megyn Kelly being fired by Fox News made the Trending list. Next, a 9/11 conspiracy theory trended. At least five fake stories were promoted by Facebook’s Trending algorithm during a recent three-week period analyzed by the Washington Post. After that, the 2008 conspiracy post trended.

Facebook

Facebook now has a "review team" working on Trending, but their new guidelines require them to exercise less editorial oversight than the previous team. A Facebook spokesperson told BuzzFeed news theirs is more of a quality assurance role than an editorial one. Reviewers are, however, required to check whether the headline of an article being promoted within a trend is clickbait or a hoax or contains "demonstrably false information." Yet hoaxes and fake news continue to fool the algorithm and the reviewers.

Facebook executives have acknowledged that its current Trending algorithm and product is not as good as it needs to be. But the company has also made it clear that it intends to launch Trending internationally in other languages. By scaling internationally, Facebook is creating a situation whereby future Trending failures will potentially occur at a scale unheard of in the history of human communication. Fake stories and other dubious content could reach far more people faster than ever before.

For Trending to become a reliable, global product, it will need to account for the biases, bad actors, and other challenges that are endemic to Facebook and the news media. Put another way, in order to succeed, the Trending algorithm needs to be better than the very platform that spawned it. That’s because fake news is already polluting the platform’s News Feed organically. A recent BuzzFeed News analysis of giant hyperpartisan Facebook pages found that 38% of posts on conservative pages and 19% of posts on liberal pages featured false or misleading content.

Facebook’s challenge with fake news has its roots, of course, in the platform’s users — us. Humans embrace narratives that fit their biases and preconceptions, making them more likely to click on and share those stories. Mark Zuckerberg acknowledged this in a Facebook post marking the 10th anniversary of News Feed.

“Research shows that we all have psychological bias that makes us tune out information that doesn’t fit with our model of the world,” he wrote.

Facebook relies primarily on what humans are doing on Facebook — likes, shares, clicks, et cetera — in order to train the Trending algorithm. The company may have ditched its editors, but we humans are still giving biased signals to the algorithm, which then mediates these biases back to an even larger group of humans. Fake news stories keep trending because people on Facebook keep reading and sharing and liking them — and the review team keeps siding with the algorithm's choices.

As far as the algorithm is concerned, a conspiracy theory about 9/11 being a controlled demolition is worth promoting because people are reading, sharing, and reacting to it with strong signals at high velocity. The platform promoted a fake Megyn Kelly story from a right-wing site because people were being told what they wanted to hear, which caused them to eagerly engage with that story.

The BuzzFeed News analysis of more than 1,000 posts from hyperpartisan Facebook pages found that false or misleading content that reinforces existing beliefs received stronger engagement than accurate, factual content. The internet and Facebook are increasingly awash in fake or deeply misleading news because it generates significant traffic and social engagement.

Facebook

“We’re just beginning to understand the impact of socially and algorithmically curated news on human discourse, and we’re just beginning to untie all of that with filter bubbles and conspiracy theories,” Starbird said. “We’ve got these society-level problems and Facebook is in the center of it.”

This reality is at odds with Facebook’s vision of a network where people connect and share important information about themselves and the world around them. Facebook has an optimistic view that in aggregate people will find and share truth, but the data increasingly says the exact opposite is happening on a massive scale.

“You have a problem with people of my parents’ generation who … are overwhelmed with information that may or may not be true and they can’t tell the difference,” Starbird said. “And more and more that’s all of us.”

The fact that Facebook’s own Trending algorithm keeps promoting fake news is the strongest piece of evidence that this kind of content overperforms on Facebook. A reliable Trending algorithm would have to find a way to account for that in order to keep dubious content out of the review team's queue.

How to train your algorithm

In order for an algorithm to spot a valid trending topic, and to discard false or otherwise invalid ones, it must be trained. That means feeding it a constant stream of data and telling it how to interpret it. This is called machine learning. Its application to the world of news and social media discussion — and in particular to the accuracy of news or circulating rumors and content — is relatively new.

Algorithms are trained using past data. This past data helps train the machine on what to look for in the future. One inevitable weakness is that an algorithm cannot predict what every new rumor, hoax, news story, or topic will look like.

“If the current hoax is very similar to a previous hoax, I’m sure [an algorithm] can pick it up,” Bontcheva said. “But if it’s something quite different from what they’ve seen before, then that becomes a difficult thing to do.”

@kerrymflynn / Twitter

As a way to account for unforeseen data, and the bias of users, the Trending product previously relied heavily on dedicated human editors and on the news media. In considering a potential topic, Facebook’s editors were required to check “whether the topic is national or global breaking news that is being covered by most or all of ten major media outlets.” They were also previously tasked with writing descriptions for each topic. Those descriptions had to contain facts that were “corroborated by reporting from at least three of a list of more than a thousand media outlets,” according to a statement from Facebook. The review team guidelines do not include either process.

The algorithm also used to crawl a large list of RSS feeds of reputable media outlets in order to identify breaking news events for possible inclusion as a topic. A Facebook spokesperson told BuzzFeed News that the algorithm no longer crawls RSS feeds to look for possible topics.

Facebook says it continues to work to improve the algorithm, and part of that work involves applying some of the approaches it implemented in News Feed to reduce clickbait and hoaxes.

“We’ve actually spent a lot of time on News Feed to reduce [fake stories and hoaxes’] prevalence in the ecosystem,” said Adam Mosseri, the head of News Feed, at a recent TechCrunch event.

Kate Starbird

Via hcde.washington.edu

Bontcheva and others said Facebook must find ways to ensure that it only promotes topics and related articles that have a diverse set of people talking about them. The algorithm needs be able to identify “that this information is interesting and seems valid to a large group of diverse people,” said Starbird. It must avoid topics and stories that are only circulating among “a small group of people that are isolated.”

It’s not enough for a topic or story to be popular — the algorithm must understand who it’s trending among, and whether people from different friend networks are engaging with the topic and content.

“Surely Facebook knows which users are like each other,” Bontcheva said. “You could even imagine Facebook weighting some of these [topics and stories] based on a given user and how many of the comments come from people like like him or her.”

This means having a trending algorithm that can recognize and account for the very same ideological filter bubbles that currently drive so much engagement on Facebook.

The Trending algorithm does factor in whether a potential topic is being discussed among large numbers of people, and whether these people are sharing more than one link about the topic, according to a Facebook spokesperson.

A suboptimal solution?

Over time, this algorithm might learn whether certain users are prone to talking about and sharing information that’s only of interest to a small group of people who are just like them. The algorithm will also see which websites and news sources are producing content that doesn’t move between diverse networks of users. To keep improving, it will need to collect and store this data about people and websites, and it will assign “reliability” scores based on what it learns, according to Bontcheva.

“Implicitly, algorithms will have some kind of reliability score based on past data,” she said.

Yes, that means Facebook could in time rate the reliability and overall appeal of the information you engage with, as well as the reliability and appeal of stories from websites and other sources.

This would lead to all manner of questions: If Facebook deems you to be an unreliable source of trending topics and information, should it have to disclose that to you, just as it does your ad preferences? Should news websites be able to see how the algorithm views them at any given time?

The Facebook Ad Preferences page.

Facebook / Via Facebook: ads

Then there’s the fundamental question of whether suppression of information and sources by algorithm is preferable to suppression by humans.

“Previously the editors were accused of bias, but if [Facebook] starts building algorithms that are actually capable of removing those hoaxes altogether, isn’t the algorithm going to be accused of bias and propaganda and hidden agendas?” said Bontcheva.

A spokesperson for the company said the current Trending algorithm factors in how much people have been engaging with a news source when it chooses which topics and articles to highlight. But they emphasized that this form of rating is not permanent and only pays attention to recent weeks of engagement. They will not maintain a permanent black or white list of sources for Trending. The company also said that the top news story selected for a given topic is often the same story that's at the top of the Facebook search results for that topic or term, meaning it's selected by an algorithm.

Now consider what might happen if, for example, there's a discussion about vaccines happening on a large scale. Maybe the algorithm sees that it's generating enough engagement to be trending, and maybe the top story is from an anti-vaccine website or blog. The algorithm may put that topic and story in the queue for review. Would a reviewer promote the topic with that story? Would they recognize that the anti-vaccine argument stems from "demonstrably false information," as their guidelines prescribe, and suppress the topic and story? Or would they promote the topic but select a different story?

Those decisions are the kinds that editors make, but Trending doesn't have those anymore. Given recent failures, it's impossible to predict what might happen in this scenario.

“Is a suboptimal solution good enough, and what are the consequences of that?” Starbird asks. “And are we as a society OK with that?”



from BuzzFeed - Tech http://ift.tt/2eHbEz5
via IFTTT