In a lot of ways, Apple had a solid 2018. It hit a trillion-dollar valuation. It navigated a slowing market for iPhones. It stuck to its guns on data privacy. It kept its promise to create lots of jobs in the U.S. The company recently said it will build a new campus in Austin, Texas and add jobs in Seattle, Culver City, and San Diego. To its credit, Apple didn’t require that cities compete for those jobs in a very public bidding war, as Amazon did with its HQ2 quest.But Apple also made a few moves during the year that will likely be seen as mistakes over the course of time. The prices of its products went way up across the board in 2018. Siri continued to exemplify Apple’s underperformance in artificial intelligence relative to companies such as Google and Facebook. And so on. Here are the five best and worst things Apple did in 2018:What Apple got rightRemaining engaged with the White House Yes, Apple does have a lot to lose from a bitter trade war with China. If things really got bad, the Trump administration could slap a big fat tariff on Apple products assembled in China–and almost all Apple products are assembled in China. This would come at an awful time for the company. It has been pushing the envelope on asking higher prices for its products–from the iPhone to the MacBook Pro to the iMac. Tariffs are always paid by customers, and a new tariff on Apple products could push some Apple buyers past the limits of their loyalty.That’s why it’s a good thing that Tim Cook has not shut off communication with the Trump White House. Despite the fact that Donald Trump’s beliefs are antithetical to Apple’s values and the political mindsets of most of its employees, it’s Cook’s job to make sure the president knows the real harm that would be done with new tariffs. By staying away from Trump, Cook would put Apple on the sidelines.Laying the groundwork for Augmented Reality Augmented Reality applications on the iPhone and iPad are still pretty clunky. You have to pick up the devices and physically move them around to overlay digital content onto the real world as seen through the camera. But it won’t always be that way. Apple will likely one day release AR glasses, so the only required movement will be the natural movement of the user’s head.What people don’t always give Apple credit for is actively setting the stage for that eventual hardware. It’s been doing so for quite some time. It launched its ARKit app development platform in 2016, and has been building AR experiences into pretty much every iOS device since then. ARKit apps and games already fill the App Store. And iOS 12 shipped with an impressively useful Measure app that allows you to measure (or level) pretty much anything in the room around you. There will be much more to come.Hiring John Giannandrea In April Apple made a marquee hire by luring away Google’s chief of AI and search John Giannandrea. Giannandrea is now leading Apple’s AI and machine learning group. He’ll report directly to Tim Cook, which gives some idea of the importance of his role and mission.It’ll be Giannandrea’s job to fix Siri, which most AI watchers say has gotten better over the years but still lags far behind its peers–Amazon’s Alexa and Google’s Assistant–in functionality and general helpfulness. With his deep experience in AI, he’s enormously qualified to help define and carry out Apple’s vision for Siri. The job, however, will likely be made harder by Apple’s conservative approach to using user data to train the AI. But if anyone can liberalize that approach in the interest of making Siri more useful, it’s Giannandrea.Bringing Apple Music to Amazon’s Echo speakers This year Apple made the surprising move of making Apple Music available on Amazon’s Alexa-powered Echo devices. This is a very consumer-friendly move, especially for the millions of people who now own both an iPhone and an Echo speaker. While Apple competes with Amazon and Google in the smart speaker market, it’s also in a fierce battle with Spotify in the subscription music service market. Apple Music has about 56 million paying users versus Spotify’s 87 million. It could be that it’s now more important for Apple to get access to all those Alexa/Echo users than it is to keep Apple Music exclusive to its own HomePod smart speaker.A new Apple Pencil The first Apple Pencil, which came out in 2015, was fine, but a little bit minimalistic. Apple updated the product this year with the $129 Apple Pencil Second Generation, adding a much easier charging method (you just snap it magnetically it to the side of the iPad). You can also tap the side of the pencil to change things like shading modes. It was a big step up and especially useful for creatives who like the iPad.[Photo: Skitterphoto/Pexels]What Apple got wrongMaking pretty much every product marketing error possible with the HomePod Apple likes to talk about how it starts with the needs and wants of the consumer and then applies technology accordingly. Something must have gone sideways with that approach when it built the HomePod. Apple was right that people use smart speakers mainly for playing music, and it did build a great-sounding speaker, but it seems to have gotten everything else wrong. People also want lower-priced speakers, and like using digital assistants with broad functionality. They also want some flexibility in where they get services such as music. With the HomePod, however, consumers got a speaker with a limited digital assistant in Siri and hardwired connections to services such as Apple Music. And it sold for a high price Of $349.What about those new AirPods? There’s a lot to like about the first version of the AirPods, starting with their sound quality and the convenience of their charging case. But they’re not perfect. They aren’t always quick to detect when I’ve put them on. They’re not perfect at holding their connection to my Apple Watch when I’m out running–especially when they have less than 50% battery charge. And there’s so much that could be added: biometric sensors, noise cancellation, hands-free Siri, and wireless charging.That’s why it’s odd that AirPods–arguably Apple’s most innovative new product in a decade–has gone almost two years without an update. Where is it? Does Apple want millions of people to buy AirPods as gifts this holiday season, then make everybody feel bad about it by announcing the second generation product in January?I mentioned AirPods 2 will likely have wireless charging. It would be nice to be able to use that AirPower charging pad we’ve been hearing about for well over a year. Where is it?Failing to announce an overarching plan for improving Siri Apple held its annual WWDC developer conference in early June. Google, Microsoft, and Facebook had already held their equivalent events, and all of them spoke a lot about AI’s role in their products and overall corporate identity. Before WWDC, I remember hoping that Apple would begin to lay out a similar narrative around Siri. Like many Apple watchers, I hoped Apple could make Siri into a familiar, highly functional and personalized, digital assistant that would work in generally the same ways, with the same intelligence, across all Apple products.Apple wasn’t ready to tell that story in early June. The company talked about specific applications of machine learning, but not about an overarching plan. Then again, Apple had hired John Giannandrea as its new AI chief only a couple of months earlier to lead AI efforts. I couldn’t help thinking at WWDC that Apple may have already waited too long.Expecting people in India to conform their buying habits to Apple prices When Apple released the iPhone X in 2017, it bet that people would pay more for premium smartphones–more than $1,000, in fact. And its optimism paid off, for the most part. It marked the beginning of a strategy of selling fewer phones, perhaps, but making more on each one.But that strategy isn’t working everywhere. The Wall Street Journal’s Newley Purnell and Tripp Mickle report that in India, Apple has continued to sell a relatively small lineup of iPhones, and for very high prices by Indian standards, in a market where people are accustomed to paying less than $300 for a phone. The idea behind releasing the iPhone SE in 2016 was to address that preference, but the SE has now been discontinued. As a result, Canalys estimates that the number of iPhones shipped in India has dropped 40% year-over-year from 2017, and Apple’s market share in the country has dropped from 2% to 1%.The Indian market holds huge potential for Apple. Like China, it was expected to be the source of new smartphone buyers, which have become hard to find in saturated markets like the U.S. and the U.K.Making ECG a major selling point of the Watch I’ll end with a controversial one. The new Apple Watch 4 can create an electrocardiogram, or ECG, which measures the electrical signals of the user’s heart. This is usually done in a doctor’s office with sensors attached to your chest. With the Watch, you just rest your finger on the Digital Crown. For most people, the ECG will render a “sinus” reading, or normal. But Apple says that the ECG can also detect signs of atrial fibrillation, which can be a sign of stroke.The ECG has emerged as the most-talked-about new function of the Watch. This is worrisome. Larger displays and new exercise modes, for example, are mainstream features that wide swaths of people will care about. But an ECG reader is a specialty feature, meant for a subset of people who have heart issues. I have no doubt that the ECG reader will do some people good (and that we’ll hear all about it in the Apple press), but for many other people it might do more harm.I’ve heard doctors say that the ability to take an ECG any time could lead to overuse or even obsessive checking by patients worried about their hearts. Even if the ECG itself works perfectly and yields no false positives it could end up raising anxiety levels, which could lead to problems.The other problem with overusing thee ECG is the amount of extraneous biometric data it could create. Using the Watch, you can send your doctor the result of your ECG. Physicians are already overloaded with data without having to read a new Apple Watch ECG result every day from one patient or another.[Photo: Alvaro Reyes/Unsplash]For Apple, 2018 brought no major breakthroughs, nor any disasters. We talk mainly about the iPhone and Apple’s growing services business as we look to the horizon to see the big new products–like cars and AR glasses–we hope Apple will bring us. We wait for the company to once again surprise and delight us.Investors seem worried and conflicted about Apple at the moment, mostly on fears that iPhone sales growth is over. The company’s stock is way down right now; in fact, it’s dropped almost $70 (or 30%) from its 2018 highs in roughly seven weeks. And yet it was only in August that the company briefly hit a $1 trillion market cap.One thing’s for sure: Apple will remain a fascinating company to watch. Next year will be pivotal as it navigates a post-peak-iPhone world.

Let’s just say it: When compiling a record of the tech industry’s blunders this year, it’s tempting to zoom in on Facebook and leave it at that. The company had an annus horribilis so rich in scandal, embarrassment, and turmoil that it’s tough to keep track of them without a scorecard.Still, limiting this list to any one company—even Facebook, even this year—would leave so many unfortunate incidents uncommemorated. From history-making data leaks to bizarre little moments, a bevy of players gave us even more reasons than usual to disabuse ourselves of the notion that technology is synonymous with progress. Herewith, a month-by-month account of what went wrong in 2018.JanuaryA sensitive exploration of a tragic situation. YouTube superstar Logan Paul blithely shares a jokey video of him stumbling across a dead body in a Japanese forest known for suicides. People take offense, he apologizes, and YouTube demonetizes his videos (but later brings some ads back).Maybe they should have stuck to selling books. T-shirts, mugs, bibs, and other goods with the slogan “Slavery Gets Shit Done” and an image of pyramids are available on Amazon.com, where they’re offered by third-party merchants. Organizations such as Anti-Slavery International are not amused; Amazon refuses to comment, other than noting that the items have been yanked, and pointing to its policy on offensive products.FebruaryHey, it’s not like that many people were watching. Hulu’s stream of Super Bowl LII cuts off during the final minutes of action for a small percentage of subscribers to the streaming service. The company later explains that its software was befuddled by the fact that the game went on past 10 p.m., when This Is Us was scheduled to begin.MarchHa. Ha. Ha. Ha. Ha. Ha. People report that Amazon’s Alexa is lapsing into jags of mysterious and creepy laughter. Amazon says the voice assistant is mistakenly thinking it heard the request “Alexa, laugh,” and changes the trigger phrase to the more distinct “Alexa, can you laugh?”VR is amaaaaaaaazing. Oculus Rift owners worldwide get mysterious errors about the “Oculus Runtime Service” and find their VR heads inoperative. Oculus fixes the problem with a software patch and issues a $15 store credit by way of apology.I told you Facebook quizzes were evil. The New York Times and Guardian report on how political data company Cambridge Analytica harvested data on Facebook users via a quiz created by an academic researcher. It turns out more than 87 million users—most of whom didn’t even take the quiz—were ensnared. Facebook bans Cambridge Analytica, but that turns out to be the beginning of the scandal rather than its end.No worries, find a friend on Verizon and swap. Sprint customers who have ordered Samsung Galaxy S9 phones report that they arrive with Verizon SIM cards. Some say that Samsung tells them to work it out with Sprint.It’s only an apology tour if you apologize. Via a Facebook post, TV appearances, and a full-page newspaper ad, Mark Zuckerberg admits that Facebook made mistakes that led to the Cambridge Analytica mess; explains what the company is doing to address them; and promises to do better in the future. He expresses regret. But he doesn’t say, “I apologize.”AprilBreaking: Harvard student irritates classmates. When Facebook CEO Mark Zuckerberg testifies before U.S. Congress on his company’s many controversies, Representative Billy Long (R-MO) chooses to grill him about Facemash, the site Zuck created in 2003 that allowed Harvard University students to rate the attractiveness of other students. Long appears to think it might still be in operation.Cool feature! Too bad you don’t have it. Facebook acknowledges that the 2014 Sony Pictures hack led it to give Mark Zuckerberg and other executives a secret feature—unavailable to the masses—that auto-deletes their old Messenger messages in the interest of privacy. The company says it will press pause on the deletions until it’s able to offer everybody else the same option.MayAt least the money went to an upstanding citizen. AT&T acknowledges that it paid $200,000 to President Donald Trump’s personal lawyer, Michael Cohen, for his insights on the new administration. The company’s CEO calls it a “big mistake.”Mea sorta culpa. TV viewers are inundated with commercials from Facebook, Uber, and Wells Fargo expressing contrition—more or less—for their respective scandals.“Alexa, behave as inappropriately as possible.” A Portland family reports that Amazon’s Alexa service recorded their conversation and then randomly sent it to a contact associated with their Amazon account. Amazon acknowledges the glitch, says it stemmed from a weird series of malfunctions leading Alexa to think someone had asked it to record and transmit the audio, and promises to tweak its technology to make such scenarios less likely.Crank Yankers it’s not. At its I/O conference, Google plays canned demos of Duplex, a new AI technology that can make phone calls to restaurants and hair stylists on a user’s behalf. It’s eerily human and doesn’t disclose it’s a computer. And people raise questions about whether the demos are as real-world as they seem.It’s right there in article XXVIII, which also covers Facebook pokes. A federal judge says that Trump’s habit of blocking some of his critics on Twitter is unconstitutional. Trump appeals the ruling a month later.JuneBroadcast yourself! Polygon reports that YouTube allows anti-LGBTQ ads to target LGBTQ-themed videos and “demonetizes” some LGBTQ-related content. After initially defending its policies, YouTube apologizes and promises to do better.Move fast and break cities. Rent-a-scooter companies Bird, Lime, and Spin dump their scooters on San Francisco’s sidewalks without warning, leading to pedestrian ire and a temporary ban while the city investigates the new mode of transportation. When it allows scooters to return in August, the three original companies are not among those permitted to do business.iPhone users will have to wait until 2020 for this feature. Users of Samsung Galaxy phones report that their devices are randomly and spontaneously sending texts and photos to contacts. After some debate whether Samsung or T-Mobile is responsible for the glitch, Samsung takes responsibility and promises to fix it.Your privacy is very important to us. In the wake of the Cambridge Analytica mess, Facebook acknowledges sharing users’ data with dozens of companies, though it says it’s ended or will soon end most of these arrangements. Though a 2011 Federal Trade Commission degree restricted Facebook’s ability to provide data to third parties, the company maintains that the device makers it had deals with were “suppliers,” not third parties.I was there, and the suspense was spine-tingling. Instagram holds a splashy San Francisco launch event for its new IGTV streaming service, but the proceedings unaccountably start an hour behind schedule. Fast Company’s Nicole Laporte later reports that the videos Instagram planned to present got accidentally deleted immediately before showtime, requiring the company to go back to backups and reformat them on the fly.JulyHappy Fourth of July! Facebook apologizes for having flagged part of the Declaration of Independence as hate speech.If it involved anything other than selling burgers, this would be offensive. Washington, D.C. area hamburger joint Z-Burger tweets a meme disparaging McDonald’s and showing a photograph of James Foley, a journalist kidnapped and murdered by ISIS. The CEO of the chain’s ad agency tweets a three-part video apology and blames the incident on an overworked art director who thought the image of Foley was from a TV show. — Michael Valor (@ValorCorp) July 23, 2018AugustWhere have you gone, Joe DiMaggio? After a reference to Colin Kaepernick is eliminated from a song in the soundtrack for Madden 19, EA apologizes. Rather than having anything to do with Kaepernick’s controversial decision to kneel during the National Anthem, the company says that employees mistakenly believed it didn’t have the right to reference him, even in a lyric.So good you won’t believe it came from a phone. A Reddit user notices that an actress who appears in a commercial for a Huawei phone has posted an Instagram picture showing that an image in the ad that looks like a selfie taken with the phone—outstretched arm and all—was actually shot by a crew member with a DLSR.The ultimate upselling opportunity. Firefighters battling Northern California’s devastating Mendocino Complex Fire discover that Verizon is throttling their connections on the grounds that they’ve exceeded their plans’ data cap. The wireless carrier initially tells them to spring for a plan with a more generous allotment but later apologizes.SeptemberKindly keep your experiments to yourself. Users of devices running Google’s Android Pie operating system notice that battery saver mode has been mysteriously enabled, even if the device in question is fully charged. Google explains that the setting was remotely flipped on by an experiment gone awry. The company apologizes.Damn you, Joker. A Q&A with T-Mobile CEO/Batman fan John Legere on his “Batphone” is disrupted when a prankster changes the voicemail recording to something described by people who heard it as “very bad” and “racist.”Gotta love those naming rights. Six weeks after it opened, San Francsico’s $2.4 billion Salesforce Transit Center closes indefinitely when cracks are detected in two of its beams.Goodbye, Burt. When Burt Reynolds dies on September 6, fans pay tribute by posting his famous 1972 Cosmopolitan centerfold—and Facebook deletes the posts for violating its community standards. The company later calls the deletions of of the slightly naughty photo a mistake.Hope you didn’t cancel any plans. A Taiwanese hacker says he’s discovered a Facebook bug that will allow him to delete Mark Zuckerberg’s account. He says he will stream the event on Facebook Live—but then backpedals and says he will instead submit the bug to the company for a bounty payment.Hey, at least it had nothing to do with Cambridge Analytica. Facebook discloses that an unknown attacker gained access to information from 50 million user accounts, including those of Mark Zuckerberg and Sheryl Sandberg. (It later downgrades the figure to 30 million.) The company says that three distinct bugs interfaced to enable the hack, and that for 14 million users, the information stolen included “username, gender, locale/language, relationship status, religion, hometown, self-reported current city, birthdate, device types used to access Facebook, education, work, the last 10 places they checked into or were tagged in, website, people or Pages they follow, and the 15 most recent searches.”OctoberThey’re gonna change it back to Tronc by 2022. Embattled media giant Tronc—the former Tribune—dumps its much-ridiculed moniker and goes back to calling itself Tribune Publishing.Moar notches. Google’s new Pixel 3 XL phone suffers from a bizarre software bug that sticks a virtual notch on its screen along with the all-too-real one.Even fake disclosure is better than no disclosure. As part of its plan to prevent abuse of its platform for election tampering, Facebook requires those buying political ads to disclose who they are. Vice tests this policy by posing as all 100 U.S. senators and trying to purchase ads. Facebook approves all of them.NovemberShoulda given him options: Donald Duck, Alfred E. Neuman . . . The Wall Street Journal reports that Oculus founder Palmer Luckey’s support of Donald Trump was a factor in his exit from Facebook–which was a firing–and that Mark Zuckerberg had earlier tried to convince Luckey to publicly announce he would be voting for Libertarian candidate Gary Johnson.Algorithms are terrible people. In the wake of vandalism at a Brooklyn synagogue, one of the slurs written on its walls—”Kill All Jews”—briefly appears in Twitter’s Trending Topics sidebar.You know you’ll miss it when it’s gone. Google says that a bug may have left the personal data of up to 500,000 users of Google+ vulnerable to unauthorized access since 2015. (According to the Wall Street Journal, it was slow to disclose the breach for fear of rattling consumers.) The company responds by announcing plans to shutter the never-successful consumer version of Google+ by August 2019.Bricked, but still beautiful. Some Apple Watch owners report that installing Apple’s WatchOS 5.1 on their timepieces causes them to become inoperable. The company withdraws the update until it can come up with a fix.Charming young man, charming young fans. Disciples of controversial YouTuber PewDiePie—alarmed that a Bollywood music video channel may surpass his 66 million followers—take advantage of a vulnerability to print messages of support for their idol on the printers of thousands of random strangers.As long as it eventually came back. After internet monitoring firms notice that Google traffic has been mysteriously traveling through China and Russia, a Nigerian ISP explains that a botched network upgrade rerouted traffic through its partner, China Telecom.Set the TARDIS for one week from now. Doctor Who fans trying to watch the current episode on Amazon Prime find that the service is actually streaming the next show before it’s supposed to be available.Super Stereotype Bros. Nintendo apologizes for Super Smash Bros. Ultimate’s depiction of Mr. Game & Watch, a character from the 1980s, wearing a feathered headdress and loincloth while brandishing a torch. It removes the imagery from the Japanese version of the game (the U.S. version never had it).Loomering large. After being banned from Twitter, far-right activist Laura Loomer handcuffs herself to the company’s New York office, bullhorn in hand, and shouts at employees as they enter the building. She accuses CEO Jack Dorsey of persecuting her as a “Jewish conservative journalist.” And after two hours of protest, she asks the police to cut off her cuffs.DecemberEven better than Huawei’s camera. A Serbian photographer finds that Samsung Malaysia’s site is misrepresenting a stock photo she took of herself with a DSLR as an example of the Galaxy A8 Star smartphone’s portrait mode.The internet is a series of tubes. Trump lawyer/cybersecurity consultant Rudy Giuliani leaves a space out of a tweet, accidentally creating the URL “G-20.In.” A clever someone registers the domain and creates a page headlined “Donald Trump is a traitor to our country.” Giuliani accuses “cardcarrying anti-Trumpers” at Twitter of having permitted the prank, which anyone could have pulled off without any cooperation from the company whatsoever. Twitter allowed someone to invade my text with a disgusting anti-President message. The same thing-period no space-occurred later and it didn’t happen. Don’t tell me they are not committed cardcarrying anti-Trumpers. Time Magazine also may fit that description. FAIRNESS PLEASE — Rudy Giuliani (@RudyGiuliani) December 5, 2018Cher and share alike. Kanye West, attending Broadway’s The Cher Show with wife Kim Kardashian, is politely called out by the actor playing Sonny Bono for using his smartphone during the performance. the dynamics of Cher and Sonny’s relationship made Kim and I grab each other’s hand and sing “I got you babe” please pardon my lack of etiquette. We have so much appreciation for the energy you guys put into making this master piece. — ye (@kanyewest) December 4, 2018A proud heritage of stealing someone else’s name. Samsung announced plans to partner with fashion brand Supreme in China—not the New York City-based Supreme, but an Italian knockoff. The collaboration generates the wrong kind of publicity, causing Samsung to reconsider.Great high-paying jobs for American robots. Chinese manufacturing giant Foxconn’s much-trumpeted deal to build a plant in Wisconsin involves a skyrocketing subsidy by taxpayers—up to $4.1 billion in breaks—and a facility of dwindling ambition which, thanks to automation, may not end up hiring that many assembly-line workers after all. Though Foxconn insists that it will eventually hire lots of people, Governor Scott Walker stops bragging about the project.It would have been kinda cool if it had been real. A semi-incomprehensible statement of support for YouTube’s PewDiePie in his quest to remain the service’s most-followed channel briefly appears on the Wall Street Journal’s site.They’re gonna change it back to Oath: by 2022. Verizon, which had tried to turn itself into a media company by acquiring AOL and Yahoo, takes a $4.6 billion write-down on the combined businesses. It then announces that it’s changing the group’s name from the memorably mystifying Oath to the anodyne Verizon Media Group. finally, the tronc-sized hole in my heart has been filled https://t.co/mKNLkKfxMy — BPLewis (@BPLewis) December 18, 2018I can’t help you with your problems, sir. During Google CEO Sundar Pichai’s testimony before the U.S. House Judiciary Committee on alleged bias by tech companies against conservatives, Congressman Steve King (R-IA)—famed for his racist tirades—asks Pichai why his granddaughter saw her grandpa’s photo and some insulting commentary about him on an iPhone. “Congressman, iPhone is made by a different company,” replies Pichai.One more bug and they’ll have to shut it down retroactively. Weeks after explaining that a Google+ data leak has prompted it to shut down the service in August 2019, Google acknowledges a different vulnerability affecting more than 52 million people, and says it will now terminate the consumer version of Google+ in April.On the bright side, they’re no longer blocking sidewalks. San Francisco Bay Area TV station KTVU reports that Oakland’s lovely Lake Merritt is awash in electric scooters from companies such as Bird and Lime. (Whether those dumping them are indulging in pure wanton vandalism or making a social statement is unclear.) 60 scooters were dredged up in October alone.This website brought to you by the color yellow. A Google training exercise gone awry causes third-party sites on the company’s network to display yellow rectangles instead of ads for 45 minutes. Google says it will pay the affected sites the money they would have gotten if they’d displayed, you know, advertising.I guess staying at Holiday Inn Express really was a sign of intelligence. Lodging kingpin Marriott says that someone has accessed the data of 500 million customers of Starwood, the rival hotelier it acquired—including, in some cases, information such as their passport numbers. The New York Times reports that the breach was part of a Chinese intelligence operation.Ironically, Snap was also considering the Potemkin Stock Exchange. The New York Post reports that when Snap CEO Evan Spiegel was mulling over which stock exchange to take his company public on in 2016, the New York Stock Exchange filled its trading floor with ringers from elsewhere in the company to impress Spiegel during a visit. When Snap IPOs, it indeed chooses the NYSE over Nasdaq.Remember when it was Microsoft who had a rep for buggy software? Facebook acknowledges that a bug allowed apps access to up 6.8 million users’ photos without permission—including images that people had uploaded but not actually shared with anyone.“Alexa, break your old record for inappropriate behavior.” A German Amazon customer who takes advantage of the European Union’s GDPR privacy laws reports receiving 1,700 Alexa audio recordings—of some other Amazon customer. They’re detailed enough to identify the second customer in question. Amazon apologizes and says that a human—not Alexa—goofed.

As reality in tech-heavy economies blends further into an unending choose-your-own adventure episode of Black Mirror, the biggest, creepiest innovation may be the big data economy built on the back of the black mirror in your hand. It’s not just Google and Facebook and Amazon and the rest of Silicon Valley sucking up our digital exhaust: A vast array of companies are increasingly capturing information about your every move for profit, and in ways that can adversely and quietly impact you.Even Sheryl Connelly, Ford’s generally optimistic futurist, is worried about what’s to come. Between surging economic inequality, a yawning digital divide, and persistent privacy violations, she says, “it’s a very 1984 moment, and you have to wonder when the other shoe will drop.”In many countries, there is little legal framework surrounding the collection and potential abuse of personal data. Last year, just a few months after Facebook’s Cambridge Analytica scandal exploded, Europe began to grapple with new rules surrounding data collection through its new General Data Privacy Regulation, or GDPR. Shortly after that, California passed the nation’s most far-reaching data privacy law, set to go into effect in 2020.The new laws were important victories for personal privacy in a year that was otherwise marred by tech industry scandals, blunders, and all kinds of reminders of innovation’s creepy side. Here are a few recent developments worth keeping an eye on this year.Face recognition: Airports, stores, casinos, and an untold number of other places are using facial recognition, even in real time, to search for suspicious people with the help of massive and obscure databases. Australia is launching a national face scanning system, and in China, facial recognition technology is catching criminals as they sip brews at a beer festival. In December, as Amazon continued to face criticism for the sale of its Rekognition service, one of the most prominent call for regulations came from one of its AI competitors. Brad Smith, the president of Microsoft, wrote, “We don’t believe that the world will be best served by a commercial race to the bottom, with tech companies forced to choose between social responsibility and market success.”A police officer uses smart glasses to recognize the face of a suspect, as seen in a 2017 simulation by the U.S. Dept. of Homeland Security.Affect recognition. So-called affect recognition software isn’t just being used to evaluate job candidates: Police are increasingly turning to AI-based systems to determine whether a person is a risk based on their facial gestures and their voice, in what some experts have described as a modern-day version of physiognomy.Related: The 60 dumbest moments in tech in 2018Digital fakes. As with digital people, the technology surrounding deepfakes—videos intended to trick viewers into thinking someone said or did (or danced) something they didn’t—has recently given way to new techniques, like deep video portraits and near photo-realistic simulations of physical places. While experts wage battle against advanced digital fakery, backed by agencies like DARPA, some are also raising alarms about the prospect of a much less sophisticated kind of attack: the spread of fake data and fraudulent documents.Alec Baldwin’s impersonation is replaced with the face of the real Donald Trump, using Deepfakes. [Image: Youtube user Derpfakes]Human botification. In a world of algorithmic suggestions, Google is now autocompleting our sentences. Convenient, sure, but nudging us a bit closer to what Google thinks we should write may also be nudging us humans into robot territory. “A lot of this predictive analytics is getting at the heart of whether or not we have free will,” tech ethicist David Polgar told Fast Company‘s Mark Wilson. “Do I choose my next step, or does Google? And if it can predict my next step, then what does that say about me?”Meanwhile, ride-hail drivers and other algorithmically-guided workers are confronted by a similarly crucial question, writes Alex Rosenblat, the author of Uberland: ‘Given that Uber treats its workers as “consumers” of “algorithmic technology,” and promotes them as self-employed entrepreneurs, a thorny, uncharted, and uncomfortable question must be answered: If you use an app to go to work, should society consider you a consumer, an entrepreneur, or a worker?’Workplace monitoring. Companies have been able to track employees’ locations and conversations for years, but the tracking is getting more invasive, and closer to workers’ bodies. Last year, Amazon received a patent for a wristband that uses haptic feedback to correct employees when they may be about to do something wrong. Still others are deploying sensors around offices to track movement and space utilization.Related: Get ready for the “splinternet”: The web might not be worldwide much longerGenetic abuse. Genome editing using tools like CRISPR promises incredible improvements to human health, but they also raise incredible medical and ethical questions that threaten to overshadow their potential benefits. In October, a Chinese researcher announced he had used CRISPR to create new human babies whose future offspring would be resistant to the AIDS virus. That led to widespread condemnation by the global research community—germline gene editing and the implantation of embryos into a human mother’s womb are illegal in many countries—but the research was a reminder that the tools for genetic modification are spreading, and could spread significant risks to ecosystems in the process. In 2017, we spoke with CRISPR pioneer Jennifer Doudna about the threats that worried her most.Related: 7 digital privacy tools you need to be using nowAs the public and privacy advocates call for more control over how companies collect their data, and more legal protections develop, another glimmer of hope has emerged from the tech companies themselves: Through protests and letters, workers are increasingly holding their employers accountable for their behavior and the risks of the products they sell. Without strong rules in place, it may be the people building creepy technology who are best positioned to keep it from getting dangerous.

Google’s chief executive, Sundar Pichai, testified before the House judiciary committee on Tuesday morning, three months after his company thumbed its nose at Congress by failing to appear alongside Facebook and Twitter at a Senate hearing on election interference.In a hearing heavy on partisan theatrics, Pichai notably refused to rule out launching a censored search engine in China, a controversial plan that has garnered significant criticism from human rights organizations as well as rank-and-file Google employees.“Right now there are no plans to launch search in China,” Pichai said numerous times, repeating a talking point that the company has relied on since news of the project leaked in August. Pichai characterized the Chinese search product as an “internal effort” and said the company would be “transparent” and consult with policy makers before launching in China.Pressed to rule out launching a tool that would enable censorship and surveillance in China, however, Pichai appeared to offer the company’s probable justification for reentering a market that it left in 2010: “We think it’s in our duty to explore possibilities to give users access to information.”“We have explored what search could look like if it were launched in a country like China,” the executive eventually conceded, though he dodged questions about specifics. He also revealed that “at one point” the company had more than 100 people working on the project.Pichai also faced questions on data and privacy issues, as well as allegations of partisan political bias – a subject of outsized fixation for Republican lawmakers.Bob Goodlatte, the Republican chairman of the committee, set the tone for much of the questioning in his opening statement, when he discussed the troubling nature of “allegations Google manipulates its algorithms to favor the political party its likes, the ideas it likes or the products it likes” – allegations that he offered no evidence for.“I lead this company without political bias and work to ensure that our products continue to operate that way,” Pichai said in opening remarks. “To do otherwise would go against our core principles and our business interests. We are a company that provides platforms for diverse perspectives and opinions – and we have no shortage of them among our own employees.”Pichai also emphasized the American-ness of the global company. “It’s no coincidence that a company dedicated to the free flow of information was founded right here in the US,” he said. “As an American company, we cherish the values and freedoms that have allowed us to grow and serve so many users.”More enlightening lines of questioning addressed Google’s privacy practices and prodigious data collection.“Google is able to collect an amount of information about its users that would even make the NSA blush,” Goodlatte said.Pichai’s responses to questions about Google’s data collection focused on the ability of users to control their privacy concerns, and generally emphasized that Google collects information in order to provide services that users want. That tradeoff was illustrated when Goodlatte both raised concerns about Google collecting information about users’ location – and admitted that he uses a fitness tracker to count the number of steps he takes each day.The executive’s testimony comes at a time of increasing scrutiny for Google. The company will emerge from 2018 significantly less damaged than Facebook, which has borne the brunt of public outrage over fake news and foreign interference in elections.But a growing labor movement within the company is putting pressure on Google over sensitive issues such as the Chinese censorship project, sexual harassment and performing work for the defense department.The company continues to draw the ire of antitrust and privacy campaigners, who hope that the incoming Democratic majority in the House could lead to regulation of the giant internet platforms.But the partisan political attacks on Google appeared to work in the company’s favor by dragooning Democratic representatives into defending the company. Some Democratic lawmakers were more forceful in their assertions of Google’s right to a political viewpoint than Pichai was.The hearing was Pichai’s first outing on Capitol Hill. The Indian-born executive took the helm of Google in 2015, when the company restructured and the then CEO, Larry Page, relinquished the role to be chief executive of Alphabet. Topics Google House of Representatives US Congress news

Quietly but confidently, Microsoft is back.For the first time in almost a decade, it’s the most valuable company in the world while its archrival Apple stumbles. It’s been lauded for its smart pivot into AI and cloud services in recent years and its acquisition of the popular GitHub software development platform. And it’s almost completely avoided the privacy debacles and questions about monopolistic tendencies that have dogged Facebook, Google, and Amazon, which have resulted in those companies facing negative headlines on a daily basis, nasty lawsuits, and their top executives being grilled in U.S. Congress.Microsoft sells targeted ads against search results, and users have complained about how their data is secured in the cloud, the company hasn’t received nearly the same level of scrutiny, and it’s been years since its executives were hauled before Congress.That’s despite the fact that Microsoft owns LinkedIn, which has raised eyebrows with its uncanny skill at suggesting connections for its 600 million users, and was recently probed in Ireland for using email addresses of 18 million non-members to buy targeted ads on Facebook. And European governments have raised concerns about the storage of user data in the cloud via Office 365, and how Microsoft plans to address those issues. And through a partnership with Facebook, Microsoft’s Bing search engine was able to see the names of “virtually all” Facebook users without their consent through 2017. And just this week, Microsoft announced a deal with Kroger’s to set up retail experiences, in which displays will feature digital ads personalized to the individual shopper, raising privacy issues as well as potential cutbacks in retail jobs.There are a few key reasons why Microsoft’s practices haven’t generated the same level of scrutiny from regulators–and the company’s history is a big part of it.“They’ve been around the block, they’ve been the evil perpetrator before, and they’ve already learned how to play very nicely with regulators,” Jennifer King, director of consumer privacy at the Center for Internet and Society Stanford Law School, tells Fast Company. “That’s one of the reasons you don’t see Microsoft executives being hauled in to Congress: They have a long-standing relationship, through lobbyists, policymakers–they’ve been in this space for decades.”In fact, it’s been over two decades since Microsoft’s bespectacled, youthful CEO Bill Gates testified to Congress and was grilled on whether the company’s “breathtaking growth” hurt competition in the software industry. And it was sued by the federal government, which accused it of running a monopoly, in a bitter, hard-fought case that took years to settle.Those confrontations taught Microsoft many lessons, including how to anticipate the concerns of regulators, reorganize the company in a way that satisfied anti-trust concerns, and make privacy a part of its organizational structure.“Microsoft took that action against them extremely seriously and really changed the organization as a result,” King says. “They had close to 20 years where they had basically re-architected their entire organization to have people who deal with privacy issues from a legal standpoint, from software standpoint, from the usability, computer interaction standpoint embedded throughout the entire organization. That is unlike any of the other tech companies.”After a series of antitrust investigations by the Federal Trade Commission and the U.S. Department of Justice (DOJ), Microsoft received a number of consent decrees, as the regulators looked closely at Microsoft’s practices, prices, and growing market share. In 2000, there was a court judgment to split up the company, which was later overturned.Microsoft CEO Satya Nadella [Photo: Dan Taylor/Heisenberg Media]“They’re the original gangster of big tech, known for sucking the air supply from their competition in the 1990s [Netscape] with implicit subsidies,” says Scott Galloway, a professor at New York University’s Stern School of Business and one of the most vocal critics of big tech. “Had the DOJ not put the brakes on Microsoft, we might not have Google today, favoring Bing as the dominant search engine.”And Microsoft has taken steps to address privacy issues. In 2016, France ordered the company to stop tracking Windows 10 users, and the Electronic Frontier Foundation criticized it for sending all kinds of telemetry data, including location, text input, touch input, and sites you visit, back to Microsoft. The company responded with a combination of more transparency—revealing what info it collects on Windows 10 users—and giving them more control, by letting users choose between basic and full levels of data collection.“Microsoft hasn’t (yet) given any reason for Congress to call them to testify on Capitol Hill. While big tech has been ripe with scandal in 2018, Microsoft remains unscathed,” Galloway notes. “While we keep barking at the moon about Facebook and Apple, Microsoft just keeps plugging along. It’s impressive.”The company’s current CEO, Satya Nadella, who assumed the role five years ago, has also earned praise for navigating the latest wave of regulatory scrutiny and privacy challenges.“The award for tech CEO of the year goes to Satya Nadella, who’s proven himself as a competent, responsible leader, able to protect the firm and its users from conflict,” says Galloway, praising the executive’s leadership and insight.Navigating roadblocks in EuropeBut it doesn’t mean the broader discussion about user privacy and data collection hasn’t touched them, especially as the company grows and adds more online communities like GitHub to its universe of products and services.Over the last few months, an army of European regulators and government agencies have shed light on some of the parent company’s global user data collection practices at LinkedIn and elsewhere, even as the company is pressing forward with new initiatives, further broadening its reach and market standing.By all accounts, Europe has been more proactive than the U.S. in probing American tech giants and asking tough questions about their privacy and consumer data practices. And Microsoft voluntarily extended Europe’s tough GDPR rights to its worldwide customer base, though it’s not clear how it could he held accountable for violating voluntary rules in the U.S.In a November report, the Irish Data Protection Commissioner detailed how LinkedIn U.S., which serves as LinkedIn Ireland’s data processor, had “processed hashed email addresses of approximately 18 million non-LinkedIn members and targeted these individuals on the Facebook Platform with the absence of instruction from the data controller.”As a result of this audit, the Irish regulator told LinkedIn “to cease pre-compute processing and delete all personal data associated with such processing.”The regulators found the company targeted non-LinkedIn members in violation of existing provisions. LinkedIn has said it compiled with the regulator’s demands.“We fully cooperated with the Data Protection Commission’s 2017 investigation of a complaint about a European advertising campaign, and found the global processes and procedures we had in place were not followed,” says Kalinda Raina, head of global privacy at LinkedIn. “We took appropriate action and have made the internal changes to help protect against this happening again.”As a result of this audit, LinkedIn says it ended globally the so-called “pre-computation” practice, which previously allowed new members to discover their connections when they joined LinkedIn.‘Alarming’ privacy concerns led to changesData privacy questions are not limited to LinkedIn.Microsoft stored sensitive data from users of Office, including subject lines from emails and full sentences that are run through a spelling and grammar checker or the translation tool, according to an audit commissioned by the Dutch Ministry of Justice & Security, which found “alarming” privacy concerns and a lack of “opt-out” options for users from having their data collected. The agency reached an agreement with Microsoft on October 26, which made changes to satisfy its customers’ preferences.While the Dutch Ministry of Justice & Security is not the country’s regulator, its report does pinpoint several gaps in Microsoft’s practices.“Covertly, without informing people, Microsoft does not offer any choice with regard to the amount of data, or possibility to switch off the collection, or ability to see what data are collected, because the data stream is encoded,” said Privacy Company, the file-storage and file-sharing venture started by internet mogul Kim Dotcom, which compiled the report for the Dutch ministry.When it comes to telemetry issues for Office 365 and Windows, Microsoft promises to do more.“We have done work in the past year to give customers more choice and transparency in what diagnostic data is shared with Microsoft, and we will do more in the coming months,” said Julie Brill, deputy general counsel and corporate vice president for privacy and regulatory affairs, in a statement to Fast Company. “There are often tradeoffs between disabling diagnostic data, and our ability to ensure security, reliability, and the functionality of product features–so we always work to make sure customers understand the impact of each option. Our approach has always been designed around feedback from customers, and we deeply value their continued input.”Concerns about the widespread use of Microsoft products by government agencies and how this data is stored offsite is not limited to Europe.In China, most Western social media sites like Facebook and Twitter are blocked, while LinkedIn has thrived and currently boasts 41 million users. To survive in the country, LinkedIn has worked with Beijing, setting up a joint venture with local partners and routinely removing posts and profile pages that are considered politically sensitive, such as those related to the Tiananmen Square massacre.Just last week, New York-based Chinese activist Zhou Fengsou, who was a student leader in the Tiananmen protests, was informed that his page had been blocked.“While we strongly support freedom of expression, we recognized when we launched that we would need to adhere to the requirements of the Chinese government in order to operate in China,” the company told Zhou in a message.Further, privacy and consumer data watchdogs say that the United States government agencies and regulators are significantly behind Europe.Microsoft appears to recognize the responsibility.“Every one of our solutions is reinforcing our core intelligent cloud and intelligent edge platform,” Nadella said on the last earnings call. “Not only are we optimistic about the opportunity for us and for our customers, we also recognize our responsibility.”The increased focus on cloud computing adds more urgency to the questions about how data is compiled and used, as Microsoft’s range of products and partnerships, in the private and public sectors.“Privacy considerations are fundamental to any acquisition and start with seeking out partners who have shared values,” says Microsoft’s Julie Brill in response to questions. “There is always more we can do on privacy at Microsoft, and the same is true for anyone we acquire.”Forward march on military contractingThe company is still in the running for the Joint Enterprise Defense Infrastructure (JEDI) project, a $10 billion contract to provide cloud services for the Department of Defense and expand Microsoft’s engagement with the U.S. government.Unlike Google, Microsoft has gone full steam ahead with government contracts that have sparked criticism among employees across the tech sector.Earlier this month, Microsoft president and chief legal officer Brad Smith expressed ethical concerns over the use of AI by the military, but he reiterated its commitment to work with the Pentagon, saying that “we think it’s more productive to be engaged than disengaged in shaping how the technology is used.”And unlike Google, Microsoft doesn’t seem as bothered by employee criticism, highlighted most recently by a blog post in October written by company staffers that urged company management not to bid on the U.S. military project JEDI. In June, 300 employees threatened to resign over its contract with U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE), which remains active.“They’ve been around longer than many of the other firms, so are very skilled at playing the government game, especially given what they learned based on past actions against them by various governments,” says Lauren Weinstein, a technology consultant based in Los Angeles and cofounder of People for Internet Responsibility.Anticipating future concernsGoing forward, the company is trying to be proactive about potential new data privacy regulations and other rules that rein in Silicon Valley, which are widely expected since there is a bipartisan consensus for such oversight of the tech sector.Last month, Microsoft expressed in a blog post its concerns about facial recognition technology’s potential for abuse. Earlier this year, a study identified racial and gender discrimination in AI facial recognition. In the post, the company said, “We should not wait for governments to act,” and committed itself to creating safeguards to address the tech in the first quarter of 2019. It remains unclear what that means for Microsoft’s own Azure facial recognition technology, which it has been busy promoting on its site.The company also recently stood out from its competitors by backing the French government’s Paris Call for Trust and Security in Cyberspace initiative, an international effort to regulate the internet and combat online censorship and hate speech. Conspicuously missing from the signatories: the U.S. government.Microsoft certainly seems all too aware of the importance of stressing user control in its new products. It recently launched a partnership with Mastercard to create a “digital identity,” emphasizing that this tool will allow users “to verify their digital identity with whomever they want, whenever they want.” It remains unclear how this initiative across financial, commerce, digital, and government services will help to create a “decentralized” identify, raising fresh concerns about Microsoft’s reach and access to user data, and how they’re collecting and using it.Arthur Patel, principal program manager in Identity Engineering at the company, insists that “Microsoft does not have and will not have access to Mastercard customer data.”And in a statement, Joy Chik, corporate vice president in the Identity division of Microsoft’s Cloud and artificial intelligence group, said, “We believe people should be in control of their digital identity and data, and we’re thrilled to first work with Mastercard to bring new decentralized identity innovations to life.”For now, it’s likely up to Europe to keep Microsoft, and their tech rivals in check. As Fast Company‘s Mark Sullivan noted, it remains unclear if any congressional action on data privacy will take place this year, or get punted into 2020. And Galloway says the U.S. regulation is “absolutely” falling behind Europe.“Compared to the U.S., Europe tends to have tougher anti-trust rules and consumer privacy protections,” he says. “I think we are headed toward a reverse D-Day. Just like we saved Europe in the middle of the 20th century, they’re going to save us from the tyranny of technology.”

Things may have seemed bad a year ago, but we’re entering into an even darker age for the media industry.Two of the biggest digital news players–HuffPost and BuzzFeed–announced sweeping layoffs last week that impacted hundreds of employees. Now over 400 BuzzFeed writers are petitioning the company for better severance after it refused to pay them out for earned time off. “[F]or a company that has always prided itself on treating its employees well, we unequivocally believe it is the only justifiable choice,” the employees wrote on Medium, imploring the company to include the paid time off.This development is especially chilling, given BuzzFeed’s checkered past with regard to organized labor. CEO Jonah Peretti, ever the shrewd businessman, knew how to exert maximum control over his employees. While multiple media companies have unionized their newsrooms over the last couple years (disclosure: Fast Company, too), the BuzzFeed CEO successfully quashed any attempt at his own company. At a companywide meeting in 2017, Peretti told his staff that, though he likes unions, he just simply doesn’t think they they are right for BuzzFeed. This pressure continued during a U.K. unionization drive, which was ultimately voted down.Now, the laid-off employees are given no choice but to accept what BuzzFeed has offered them. Notably, the severance package didn’t include earned time off, and without the leverage of a union, BuzzFeed has no reason to meet these people halfway. It’s an especially ruthless decision, given the company’s years of trying to bill itself as a haven for millennial creatives. BuzzFeed is not planning on paying out vacation days to laid off workers (outside of CA, where it’s state law). Some people had many days, especially essential staff who worked weekends and holidays in exchange for extra comp days. I signed this. https://t.co/sekPMIxXGQ — Katie Notopoulos (@katienotopoulos) January 27, 2019In response to the employee calls, BuzzFeed‘s chief people officer Lenke Taylor sent the following memo to the organizers of the petition:We would like to have a dialogue with the news staff council and staff from other departments on PTO payout. We are open to re-evaluating this decision but we think it is important for everyone to understand the tradeoffs in changing the PTO practice, how we came to the decision to offer everyone a minimum of 10 weeks salary, and the ways we’ve adjusted our severance to be fair and competitive in every state where we operate. We will follow up soon with next steps so a representative group of employees from across the company can meet with Jonah and me about this. You’ll hear from us by the end of the day Monday on scheduling and next steps.(Update: see below.)Of course, BuzzFeed and HuffPost aren’t the only companies announcing sweeping cuts, nor is Peretti the sole media executive strategically circumventing organized labor efforts. At the end of last year, digital news startup Mic laid off nearly all of its workforce and sold to Bustle founder Bryan Goldberg in a fire sale. In the last month, Mic quietly relaunched with a brand-new staff that seems to be regurgitating old, unfinished work–despite the fact that Mic‘s old staff writers were in the process of unionizing. Other large media companies have seen big cuts in the last year too, including Gannett, Vox Media, and Vice.All of these events occurred for roughly the same reasons: The digital advertising headwinds of the last few years have meant that executives and investors haven’t gotten the return on investment they expected from these once-hot media startups. As Google and Facebook continue to control the majority of the online ad revenue, the companies whose business models depend on ads suffer. Since 2016, there have been thousands of pivots, shifts, layoffs, and reorganizations.How did we get here?Why they happen is twofold: The Google-Facebook duopoly took control of the ecosystem when no one was looking, and media executives–high on VC cash infusions–bloated their businesses in the name of scale, often without regard to sustainability.Underlying the greed of Google and Facebook that brought us to this point is the folly of the media executives and their growth-minded investors. BuzzFeed is the perfect example. For years, it was lauded as the poster child of a media company in the digital age. It started as a content farm and meme factory, and then added journalism to its offerings. Over the years, it simultaneously broke stories and brought in page views. At the time, legacy news organizations first scoffed at, then mimicked BuzzFeed‘s social-first approach to news distribution. It was a growing media empire that couldn’t be ignored in the new technology age.But as an outlet largely dependent on social platforms like Facebook, BuzzFeed was forced to follow platform trends. When Facebook announced it was focusing on video content, BuzzFeed turned its resources just to that. Brands like Tasty were born, which force-fed ubiquitous birds’-eye view videos of generally unappetizing food to the masses. And for a while, this seemed to work. Videos were performing well, thanks to Facebook’s algorithmic push, and BuzzFeed once again looked like a digital trailblazer. But this bet was predicated on the whim of a social network known for pendulum strategy shifts at the expense of its clients; this pivot didn’t take into account what would happen if Facebook changed course. It shouldn’t come as a shock that Facebook did precisely that.Once Facebook de-emphasized videos to promote more “personal” content about a year ago, the bloodbaths followed. Layoffs continued as video views and page views declined. It was a classic bait and switch: Facebook had spent years wooing publishers and advertisers to depend on it–driving massive amounts of traffic as more and more people took to the platform. In the meantime, its share of the advertising revenue grew enormously, taking up more than 20% of the digital spend. And when Facebook decided to focus its algorithm elsewhere, the media businesses that depended on this revenue flow were screwed.Now publishers are in a bind and forced to figure out ways to diversify revenue and grow their audiences after years of bloated growth, thanks to platform machinations. Peretti was long considered a soothsayer when it came to digital consumption. But he did not have the foresight to see why a platform-reliant path to profitability was a reckless bet. Nor did he factor in what sort of impact on the industry as a whole his moves would make.Which leads us to the present. BuzzFeed, in its pursuit to become profitable, has laid off hundreds. Thousands of others have been let go over the last many months. It’s now becoming clear that the business path was misguided from the onset. It followed the ethos of tech’s scale and conquer–build, break, invest, repeat–for a revenue model that simply doesn’t work that way. BuzzFeed was trying to build and scale by following any algorithmic quirk it could; the hidden engine was the investors demanding quicker growth and greater abilities to achieve return on investment.The real costThere’s no silver bullet for fixing the media business model, beyond companies realizing that the margins are tough, and that it’s an ecosystem whose growth potential and profitability likelihoods are diametrically different from tech. We’re in the midst of a giant consolidation because of a false myth that fed entrepreneurial greed.The next few years are going to be interesting, and probably devastating. Media companies are realizing how unsustainable their business strategies have been until now. And many don’t seem to have a solid grasp on how to go forward.Companies will likely merge, others will shut down. The collateral damage is always the same: The employees caught in the middle, with no job security, and the dimming hope that their industry can rebound and regrow.Update: Following the outcry, BuzzFeed decided to include PTO in its severance package.

Shortly after The Intercept broke the story about Google’s Dragonfly project–a censored, snooping search engine in development for the China market–engineer Jack Poulson decided it was time to leave the company. The senior researcher and AI expert submitted an epic resignation letter in late August, just 19 days after The Intercept article, and he began speaking very publicly as more news about Dragonfly broke. He also submitted a letter to the Senate Commerce Committee ahead of hearings where Google’s chief privacy officer Keith Enright testified.Poulson contacted me today with word of the next shoe to drop. As Google CEO Sundar Pichai gets ready to appear before the House Judiciary Committee on December 11 to answer questions about how Google handles data, a six-group coalition has formed to oppose Dragonfly.They’ll make their case on December 10–the 70th anniversary of the UN’s Universal Declaration of Human Rights–in a pair of online press conferences, one at 10 a.m. GMT, and another at 11 a.m. EST. Poulson will speak at both, along with Tibetan, Uyghur, and Chinese rights activists, in an event that will formally launch what they call a “global campaign” against Dragonfly.Article 12 of the UN Declaration reads:No one shall be subjected to arbitrary interference with his privacy, family, home or correspondence, nor to attacks upon his honour and reputation. Everyone has the right to the protection of the law against such interference or attacks.The organizers are planning a multi-pronged campaign including an online petition (which is already live), protests, and encouraging advocacy from elected officials. A website for the campaign, StopGoogleCensorship.online, recently launched.The participating groups are Free Tibet, Students for a Free Tibet, SumOfUs, Tibet Action Institute, Tibet Society UK, and the International Tibet Network.From a press release announcing the new campaign against Dragonfly.Google, which left China in 2010 over a hacking campaign by the Chinese government, has faced an extraordinary volume of criticism over its efforts to return to the mainland, where its services are largely blocked.Anger heated up again in late October when The Intercept‘s Ryan Gallagher, who first broke the Dragonfly story, reported on the lengths to which executives had gone to curtail internal debate, to the extent of shutting out Google’s security and privacy teams. Google claims the article is incorrect and that Dragonfly is not nearly as far along as Gallagher reports.This article has been updated with details of the campaign.Contact me confidentially at [email protected] or Twitter DM @seancaptain. We can also set up a Signal call.

It may be chilly now in Google’s hometown of Mountain View, California. But that’s nothing compared to the frigid temperatures expected on Tuesday in Washington, D.C., when Google CEO Sundar Pichai heads to Capitol Hill. Having skipped a Senate Intelligence Committee panel in September on state-sponsored election meddling on technology platforms, Google will be the sole guest at a House Judiciary Committee hearing (at 10 a.m. ET) titled, “Transparency & Accountability: Examining Google and its Data Collection, Use and Filtering Practices.” Pichai’s grilling will include charges of search result political bias, mishandling of user security on the moribund Google+ social network (which just revealed another leak), and collaboration with China’s repressive regime on the Dragonfly search engine project.Republican representatives will likely bring up charges of bias against conservative voices in Google search results. They will have a hard time proving their point, since good search results are intended to surface valuable information–not the preferred conspiracy theories of far-right sites like Gateway Pundit—and since it doesn’t make sense for Google, which makes money by surfacing ads on results pages, to deliberately alienate people of a particular political view.But don’t expect a nuanced, informative discussion of algorithm bias, which is likely beyond the technical understanding of most representatives—so look forward to tough questions from Republicans and platitude-filled replies from Pichai describing the company’s commitment to fairness and objectivity.Likely more interesting will be the topic on which both Republicans and Democrats have some common ground: concern over Google’s well-reported Dragonfly project to build a search engine product for China that not only censors results but tracks what citizens search for.Mistrust of China spans the political spectrum, due to geopolitical and human rights concerns. Republicans may be especially incensed that Google is pulling out of supplying AI technology to the Pentagon’s Project Maven, while continuing to pursue a deal with the country’s military and economic rival. Human rights concerns have been especially inflamed by the widely reported detention of 800,000 to 2 million Uighurs and other Muslim minorities in concentration camps.Google’s only defense on Dragonfly so far is that the project is in its initial stages–something contradicted in extensive reporting by the Intercept. And even if Google’s assertions were true, it’s not much of a defense.After withdrawing from search in China in 2010 over ethical concerns and a hacking attack, and after publishing a statement of AI principles in response to employee protests over Maven, Google appears to have ignored the high-minded statements it made in both those cases. So says scientist Jack Poulson, who resigned from Google in opposition to Dragonfly last August. He cites in particular what he claims is Google’s hypocrisy over its pledge to not “design or deploy . . . technologies whose purpose contravenes widely accepted principles of international law and human rights.”“I think what we should look at is their actions, not their words,” Poulson said on a teleconference this morning, convened by a new tech and human-rights coalition opposing Dragonfly. “They very much would like to promote these [AI] principles as something they stand for. But when it comes time for actually making a tough decision and needing to stand on these principles in a difficult way, there’s a refusal.”It’s a long shot. But if members of Congress can get Pichai to go beyond platitudes and talk about how lofty principles do or don’t apply to on-the-ground decisions, take note.

Natasha Tusikov is assistant professor, criminology, Department of Social Science at York University in Toronto, and Blayne Haggart is associate professor of political science at Brock University in St. Catharines, Ontario.When it came to our online lives, 2018 was revealing in its dysfunction.The company also stands accused by a United Nations agency of contributing to a genocide in Myanmar by failing to effectively police hate speech on its platform. Others have noted how radio played a similar role in the 1994 Rwandan genocide. Regulation is inevitableThese and other socially destabilizing behaviors have brought us to the point where even U.S. tech companies, strident libertarians, have resigned themselves to the fact that greater government regulation is inevitable. Tim Cook, Apple’s CEO, said in November 2018 that “the free market is not working” in regards to regulating tech companies’ use of personal data, and that government regulation is “inevitable.”The form that this government regulation may take will be a critical debate in 2019. A new year offers a fresh start for thinking about how best to regulate social media companies’ use of personal data.Calls to regulate social media companies are now coming from scholars and politicians. In December 2018, Canada’s federal Standing Committee on Access to Information, Privacy and Ethics proposed tough new rules on political advertisements on social media.But what should these rules look like, and what should they address?As researchers studying internet governance and the regulation of personal data, we identify two elements are at the heart of the social media problem.First, if, as commonly argued, social media platforms are our contemporary town squares, they are being operated as for-profit enterprises dependent on the accumulation and monetization of personal data, a practice that Harvard Business School Professor Shoshana Zuboff calls surveillance capitalism.Second, although these social media companies operate worldwide, they are based in the United States and operate through American rules and norms. The exceptions of course are China-based social media giants like WeChat and Weibo.Regulation strategiesThe coming year is likely to see many debates on possible regulatory strategies. We offer several ideas to help shape those debates.First, it’s necessary to prohibit the data-intensive, micro-targeted advertising-dependent business model that is at the heart of the problem. In line with what the Public Policy Forum has recommended, reforms in this area should eliminate incentives for the collection and hoarding of data for purposes unrelated to delivering services.As the search engine DuckDuckGo demonstrates, advertising-based business models need not rely upon selling detailed data profiles of customers. DuckDuckGo relies upon advertising keywords based on users’ search queries but, unlike Google, it does not collect data on its users.Second, it’s vital that countries craft rules that are appropriate to their particular domestic social, legal, and political contexts. A common criticism is that this is a form of state censorship. But all speech is subject to some form of regulation, such as the prohibition of hate speech.Domestically crafted legislation recognizes that Canada and Germany regulate hate speech more strictly than the United States.Globally operating tech giants tend to resist being subject to different countries’ laws, arguing that global standards are best suited to govern the internet, but these standards often reflect U.S.-style rules and norms that may conflict with local values.Third, and most provocatively, it’s time to consider non-commercial ownership of social media entities–including nonprofit or some form of public ownership. This has been recommended by several U.S. and U.K. scholars, as well as one of us, to replace the fundamentally flawed for-profit companies that dominate these spaces.Government-managed digital infrastructureAlong the same lines, some scholars are also calling for dominant tech platforms to be regulated as public utilities, given their power in operating private informational infrastructure.If social media platforms are the new town squares that are essential to facilitating public dialogue, then such spaces are too important to be left to profit-focused enterprises that are unaccountable to a given country’s citizens. In Canada, where I live, instead of paying for social media with our data, such platforms could be supported through user fees or taxes, or be operated as a Crown corporation.While this may seem radical, remember other important elements of infrastructure–telecoms, railways, and energy companies–have historically been publicly owned. Others, like banks, are very strictly regulated. If we’ve learned anything from 2018, it’s that industry self-regulation is a recipe for ongoing disasters.Related: Mark Zuckerberg’s mentor handed the feds an argument that could be used to break up FacebookWe recognize that many are uncomfortable with the idea of the government imposing strict regulation or ownership rules on social media.This isn’t a call for an authoritarian internet, but rather, an acknowledgement that someone will be making the rules. If our choice is between government and business–and it is–only government can credibly provide the accountability and responsiveness to protect the public and safeguard democratic integrity.This story originally appeared at the Conversation.

Several committee members, mostly Republicans, raised the issue of the Justice Department’s willingness to investigate the impact of Google’s and Facebook’s dominance on competitiveness in the tech industry. “I would like to weigh in to some of these issues. I’d like to have the antitrust support that effort, to get more involved in reviewing the situation from a competition standpoint,” Barr said.Barr noted that he didn’t believe breaking up large companies is always the answer to lack of competition in a given market. “I don’t think big is necessarily bad,” Barr said to Senator Mike Lee (R-UT). But he suggested the tech industry and its consumers may be hurt by the dominance of a few players. “I think a lot of people wonder how such huge behemoths that now exist in Silicon Valley have taken shape under the nose of the antitrust enforcers.”Senator Josh Hawley (R-MO) raised the issue of the Facebook 2011 consent decree, which, among other things, requires Facebook to give consumers notice and get their consent before sharing their information beyond their privacy settings. Critics say the Federal Trade Commission has failed to enforce the decree, even as Facebook has been found to have used its members’ data in unauthorized ways numerous times in the last seven years. Unfortunately, Barr declined to comment on the question of whether or not the department under his leadership might pursue the matter.Hawley tried to get Barr to say whether he believed the big tech platforms tweak their algorithms to affect voter turnout in ways that disadvantage conservative and libertarian candidates. But Barr passed on this question, too, saying only: “I’m not sure what to think about that.”Barr, who sat on the board of Time Warner until its sale to AT&T closed last year, recused himself from the Department of Justice’s appeal of a federal court ruling allowing that merger to go forward. Barr made $1.73 million in 2018 from the merger, according to a form filed with the U.S. Office of Government Ethics.Committee members also raised questions about the attorney general’s interest in, and willingness to, scrutinize big tech companies’ handling of consumers’ personal data. “I also am interested in the issue of privacy and the question of who owns this data,” the nominee said. “It’s not an area that I’ve studied closely or become an expert in, but I think it’s important for the department to get more involved in these questions.”

Just when you thought there weren’t any more apps worth downloading, along comes 2018 with plenty of fresh ideas. Some of these apps first appeared this year, while others are significant upgrades. Either way, they’ll all help you make better use of your phone, tablet, or computer.[Animation: courtesy of Google]Boost your productivityGmail gets with the times Sweeping product redesigns are always polarizing, but the new Gmail, the first overhaul in five years, weathered the storm by packing in loads of new features. Now you can manage emails and view attachments with one click from the inbox, and there’s a universal “snooze” function that works across desktop and mobile. You can also send self-destructing or password-protected emails in “Confidential Mode,” and can have Google do the hard work of writing your actual emails with Smart Reply. The only downer? Inbox, the beloved Gmail alternative where Google experimented on many of those new features, will shut down by the end of March. [iOS, Android, web]Unlocking iOS’s potential Eighteen months after acquiring the iPhone/iPad automation app Workflow, Apple launched a beefed-up version called Shortcuts, which lets you set up multi-step routines to get things done faster. The best way to get started is to activate some ready-made Shortcuts, such as the YouTube video downloader and instant collage creator, but digging into the app on your own can be even more rewarding. [iOS]The master planner If you’ve ever wished for one app to handle all your to-do lists, planning boards, and notes, Notion might be just what you need. Notion’s neatest trick is how it lets you view the same data in different ways. You can create a checklist with due dates, then use a calendar view to glance at all your upcoming deadlines. Or write detailed project notes in Markdown, then drop them into a Kanban board to track their progress. Notion first launched in 2016, but got a major overhaul and Android support this year. It’s free for basic personal use, and has several subscription tiers for individuals and teams. [iOS, Android, desktop]Transcription without the busywork Next time you need to transcribe a meeting, give Otter a try. The app uses speech recognition to create transcripts automatically, even identifying multiple speakers and picking out keywords. Those transcriptions are then stored online so you can access them from anywhere. Otter is free for up to 10 hours of recordings per month, and then costs $10 per month or $80 per year. [iOS, Android, web]Protect your privacyThe educational browser While DuckDuckGo is best-known for its anti-tracking search engine, its mobile web browser and desktop browser extension is even more useful. For every website you visit, DuckDuckGo provides a letter grade based on the site’s tracker use, encryption practices, and privacy policies. Over time it will even name and shame the top tracking network offenders. Of course, it also blocks trackers by default and lets you erase your browsing history with just a couple taps. You can’t set Google as the default search engine, but that’s by design. [iOS, Android, Chrome, Firefox]Password protection While any decent password manager will help break your worst login habits (like using the same password everywhere), 1Password now goes a step further. A new feature called Watchtower monitors for stolen passwords, calls out your weakest and most reused passwords, and even lists sites where you can activate two-factor authentication. Watchtower is part of 1Password 7, which also includes a fresh design, rich notes, Mac app integration, and safer storage of its encryption key in the Secure Enclave of Macs with Touch ID. [Mac, Windows, Linux, iOS, Android, Chrome OS][Photo: courtesy of Cowlines]Find stuff fasterTransportation for the carless: Google Maps is great for getting directions with a single mode of travel, but what if you want to mix and match? Cowlines is designed specifically for folks who don’t have their own car, and combines public transit, ride shares, bike shares, and walking to find the fastest and cheapest routes. It’s currently available in 62 North American cities. [iOS]DNA tests for music For the last six years, WhoSampled has allowed music fans to trace samples and cover songs back to the original artists. A major app update this year added Shazam-like music recognition, so you can grab that sample data when you’re out at the bar. The app is free on Android and $4 on iOS, and the recognition feature costs $10 per year. [iOS, Android]Who’s got the game? While plenty of streaming video search engines already exist (one example, Reelgood, made our list last year), B/R Live searches specifically for sports. For any upcoming game, you can see where to watch it on TV, through streaming services, on the radio, and even at nearby bars. It even covers niche streaming services such as ESPN+, and occasionally offers some sporting events for free. [iOS, Android]Discover a new favorite utility or twoVirtual tape measure Even if it can’t match the accuracy of a ruler, Apple’s Measure app is great for sizing up boxes, furniture, and other flat surfaces in a pinch. Just use your iPhone or iPad camera to find an object, hit the + button while pointing at the edges, and let Apple’s augmented reality tech handle the measurements. [iOS]Text from your laptop Cross-device messaging is finally a standard Android feature with Android Messages for the Web. Head to messages.android.com on a computer or tablet, then scan the QR code in Android’s Messages app (found behind the menu button, under “Messages for web”). Now you can dish out texts on a real keyboard without having to install any third-party apps. [web]Fast photo transfers It’s still an “experimental” app, but Microsoft’s Photos Companion app is already a fast and easy way to send pictures to your PC over Wi-Fi. Just follow the instructions under “How do I use this app,” then use the Import button in the Windows 10 Photos app to start grabbing images from your camera roll. It beats waiting for your cloud storage service to finish syncing. [iOS, Android]Get creativeMobile editing studio Who says an iPad can’t replace your laptop? For video editing, at least, LumaFusion might be all you need, offering multi-track support, dozens of effects, and pro tools such as anchoring and slip editing. A pair of meaty updates this year brought even more features, including network storage drive support and a huge library of royalty-free media. The $20 asking price is on the high end for an iOS app, but it beats paying hundreds for Final Cut. [iOS]Because the world needs more podcasts After a foray into short-form audio didn’t pan out, Anchor pivoted this year to become a simple podcast creation app. You can start recording by holding the phone up to your ear, and invite other folks to participate remotely. Once you’ve recorded some segments, you can shuffle them around, edit individual audio files, and publish the finished work to major podcasting platforms. You can even opt into sponsorships and start getting paid—assuming anyone wants to hear what you have to say. [iOS, Android]On-the-go artistry Procreate has long been an essential tool for iPad artists. This year, its developers completely rewrote its iPhone counterpart, Procreate Pocket. Version 2.0 has a new interface that keeps menu bars to a minimum, and it achieves near feature parity with the iPad edition with 136 brushes and the same drawing engine. It can also export time-lapse videos of your creations, and—since iPhones don’t support Apple’s Pencil—uses 3D Touch for pressure-sensitive sketching. [iOS]A camera with depth Nothing beats the convenience of Apple’s built-in iOS camera, but Obscura 2 is great for those times when you want more control. Manual focus and exposure control are just a tap away, and a scrollable menu lets you quickly switch image formats, adjust white balance, and access a leveling tool, among other options. Several shortcut buttons are customizable as well, and the app comes with 19 filters. For all that, $5 doesn’t seem like a lot to ask. [iOS]Relax a littleGame changer It feels like ages since Fortnite landed on the iPhone, even though it was just nine months ago. It isn’t just an addictive game, but a social experience that’s always evolving with new features and special events. And by allowing virtually anyone to see what the fuss is about, developer Epic Games turned an already-popular PC and console game into a worldwide phenomenon. Meanwhile, Epic continues to use Fortnite to uproot industry norms: It distributed the Android version directly, thereby denying Google a revenue cut; goaded Sony into embracing cross-platform play; and is now trying to take on Valve’s Steam with a new PC game store. [iOS, Android, desktop]That’s one way to play Solitaire It’s not exactly new, but you can now install a self-contained version of Windows 95 on modern Windows, Mac, or Linux computers. That lets you write something in Wordpad, install a free trial of AOL, or just play the good version of Solitaire from before Microsoft ruined it with ads. It’s the best nostalgia hit you’ll get this year. [desktop]Podcasts, radio-style If you’ve been sleeping through the podcast craze, figuring out where to start can be tough. Scout FM does the legwork for you, picking podcasts automatically based on whatever interests you flag during setup. Once a podcast starts playing, you can mark it as a favorite, bookmark it for later listening, or swipe through to other suggestions. You can also use Scout’s Alexa skill to pick up where you left off. [iOS, Android]Upgrade yourselfStep your game up One of the neater uses of Apple’s ARKit framework, HomeCourt is a virtual basketball trainer that watches you shoot hoops through the iPhone or iPad camera. Beyond just detecting makes and misses, the app breaks down stats such as release angle and jump height, then provides advice on how to improve. HomeCourt is free to try, but you’ll need a subscription (starting at $5 per month) to track more than 300 shots per month. [iOS]Software-enhanced friendship Relationship management software is already essential in the business world, but Ryze takes that idea and applies it to your personal life. For any contact, you can set up periodic reminders to get in touch, and attach notes to help you remember past conversations. It even takes a page from Snapchat and creates “streaks” for all the times you’ve successfully stayed in touch. Several apps with this kind of functionality have launched this year, but Ryze is the most fleshed out. [iOS]Spend wisely Finance management app Qapital became a subscription service this year, and also began to act more like a bank, FDIC insurance and all. Customers can now get a debit card, set aside a portion of paychecks for expenses, and even invest some savings into a stock portfolio. Plans range from $3 per month to $12 per month, depending on which features you want. That might be a small price to pay, with Qapital claiming to save users $1,500 per year on average. [iOS, Android]

谈及东南亚，似乎让人感觉始终活在中国和印度两大经济体的庞大「阴影」之下。然而，科技在东南亚却有着让人意想不到的经济发展潜力。近日，Google 与 Temasek 联合发布了第三份「e-Conomy 联合报告」，对谷歌掌握的互联网使用情况和智能手机的渗透率方面的数据，以及淡马锡对东南亚各国投融资情况的调查，加上其他的报告综合起来，从多个方面的数据解读东南亚未来十年移动互联市场的潜力。报告显示东南亚地区的互联网经济规模预计在未来七年内增加 7 倍，达到 2400 亿美元之多，超出此前估值近五分之一。这份报告覆盖的市场包括东南亚六大经济体：印尼、马来西亚、菲律宾、新加坡、泰国和越南。其中，印尼的互联网经济规模将增至 1000 亿美元，占整个东南亚地区的五分之二。今年，东南亚地区的互联网经济已经达到了 720 亿美元的市场规模，其中包括了电商、网约车、网络媒体和在线旅游四个行业的数据。独角兽推动电商行业 电子商务领域是四个行业中增长速度最快的领域，在 2018 年达到了 230 亿美元。根据预测，到 2025 年，东南亚电商市场规模将达到 1020 亿美元，较今年上涨 79 亿美元。其中，印度尼西亚是东南亚地区最大的电子商务市场，在 2025 年预计市场规模将达到 530 亿美元，占东南亚市场规模的近一半之多。泰国和越南的电商市场规模将排名第二和第三。东南亚最大的三家独角兽企业 Lazada、Shopee 和 Tokopedia（均为东南亚运营商）对东南亚地区电子商务的推动起了至关重要的因素。网约车成为日常截至目前，网约车已经覆盖东南亚超过 500 座城市，成为人们的主要出行方式之一，使用人数超过 3500 万人，是三年前的 4 倍多。印度尼西亚同样是网约车在东南亚最大的市场，谷歌和淡马锡的报告包含了打车和外卖两部分的数据。2018 年网约车行业的 GMV（Gross Merchandise Volume，即成交总额）达到了 77 亿美元，预计到 2025 年，网约车行业的 GMV 将达到 280 亿美元。根据报告显示，Go-Jek 从印度尼西亚的市场开展扩张，获得了快速的市场增长。从 2015 年的每日乘车用户数量 150 万增长到 2018 年的 800 万，月活跃用户从 2015 年的 800 万增长到如今的 3500 万。与网约车的核心业务相比，食品配送的增长更加快速。Grab 和 Go-Jek 针对东南亚市场的特殊需求，将网约车软件做成了集合打车、外卖等生活服务一体的按需服务的大型综合软件。网络媒体和在线旅游受到移动互联网用户参与度的推动，网络媒体行业预计在 2025 年达到 320 亿美元的市场规模。其中，在线广告的市场规模最大，预计在 2025 年达到 200 亿美元。而在线旅行行业的市场规模也预计在 2025 年达到 780 亿美元，在线机票预定的市场规模将达到 400 亿美元。随着东南亚互联网市场的爆发，相应的问题也随之而来。众所周知，东南亚大多是海岛国家，接近 4 亿的互联网用户和消费者分布在大大小小的众多热带雨林和岛屿中，这使得市场的开拓变得尤为困难。也许，这正是印度尼西亚在本次报告中数据突出的原因，印度尼西亚拥有人口超千万的「超级城市」雅加达，地形多以平原为主，中产阶级大多都聚集在城市中，消费者主力聚集在大中型城市中，使得市场的开拓和发展阻碍较小。同时，也为物流业的发展造成了阻碍。当着眼于整个东南亚时，像雅加达一般的「超级城市」只有六座，分别是雅加达、马尼拉、海德巴拉、班加罗尔、德利以及孟买。互联网企业大多是首先在这样的大型城市起步，但是每个城市之间距离对于企业发展来说太过于遥远，不同的文化、不同的语言习惯、不同的风俗，都为企业的发展带来重重阻碍。也许这也解释了为什么所以很多商业机会「巨头」会选择性忽略，因为以巨头的体量评估过进入这样的市场实在并不是件合算的事情。因此众多巨头借道当地企业进入东南亚市场，而不选择直接进驻。并且，在东南亚地区，最容易被用户接受的支付方式依然是现金支付。根据谷歌的数据显示，东南亚不到一半的互联网用户使用数字支付服务，在越南和菲律宾，这个数字下降到不足四分之一。这种情况显然「阻碍了游戏，订阅音乐和视频点播等数字商品的增长，大多数东南亚互联网用户仍然偏爱对应的免费替代品。」现在的东南亚，刮起了一股学习中国模式的热潮，来自东南亚的企业家、创业者们争先学习来自中国的经营理念和经营模式，试图复刻中国在互联网领域的成功。而中国互联网也在经历了与美国对标阶段、垂直细分阶段，才最终到了自主创新模式领先阶段，其中每一个阶段大概经历了 5 年的时间。然而，尽管东南亚这个超级「国家联盟」面临互联网的拐点时有各种弊端，但这个总人口已经超过美国的区域却让人看到了无限的潜力和上升空间。现在的东南亚已经迅速把前两个阶段的「形」拷贝过来了。但是，中国市场和东南亚市场的条件是截然不同的，在中国获得成功的模式并不一定会在东南亚完全适用。即便是所谓「copy from states, copy from China」这样的标语日益盛行，但真正成功的企业和投资者都已经从「中国基因」中寻求突破，以适应自身企业所处环境。真正的好公司，一定诞生在本地自主创新模式里。参考：e-Conomy SEA 2018: Southeast Asia's internet economy hits an inflection pointGoogle report: Southeast Asia's digital economy to triple to $240 billion by 2025题图：Google 官网责任编辑：宋德胜

That other New York billionaire businessman and politician, the less brash and inflammatory one – former city mayor Michael Bloomberg – took on Donald Trump in the vital primary election state of New Hampshire on Tuesday as he tests the waters for a 2020 presidential bid.The topics he chose to zero in on were the president’s business record and climate change, which many candidates running against Trump will probably make a key issue in the next race for the White House.Bloomberg ripped Trump for saying he did not believe his own administration’s report warning of the dire consequences of climate change.“He failed at business, and now I think it’s fair to say he is failing at government,” Bloomberg said in a speech at Saint Anselm College.“His own administration produced a damaging report showing that we have what they called substantial damage to the US economy, environment and human health from climate change. And you know what the president said in response? ‘I don’t believe it,’ he said. How can you not believe it?” Bloomberg said.“I hate to break this to you, Mr President, but if you don’t believe in science, don’t go to the doctor, don’t get on an airplane, don’t talk on the phone, and don’t even think about tweeting.”Bloomberg who served 12 years as New York mayor and has at various points identified as a Democrat, Republican and independent, is considering a 2020 run in the Democratic primary.On his swing through New Hampshire, which hosts the nation’s first primary, Bloomberg said the ravages of climate change are already clear, from wildfires and hurricanes to ticks that are killing 70% of baby moose in New Hampshire and Maine because warmer weather is allowing them to live through the winter.“What’s happening is really scary, and it may be irreversible. I hope not,” he said. “What we need is a president that can lead us forward, instead of trying to drag us backwards.”Bloomberg said a “Green New Deal”, embraced by many progressives, should include economic development and job training for coalmining regions and other areas whose economies are dependent on fossil fuels, criticizing the Trump administration for trying to cut funding for job training in coalmining regions.“The hypocrisy of what the president said and then what the president’s trying to do is just staggering. The president likes to give rallies and speeches where he makes promises to miners about bringing their jobs back, but I think it’s clear to everybody at this point – even the coalminers – those are just empty words,” Bloomberg said.Now presenting as a newly minted Democrat, Bloomberg also took shots at Trump over the government shutdown.“It’s an example of just how totally incompetent management can needlessly hurt millions of people,” he said.Asked by an audience member whether he had embraced veganism to help the environment, the mayor, known for his public health crusades, confessed an occasional steak was the least of his vices.“I’m addicted to Cheez-Its and popcorn. And if you can get rid of all the other bad things but just don’t get rid of those two, I’d be very happy. I’m also addicted to Subway sandwiches and could eat one every night for dinner,” he said, adding that he had cut down on red meat but still enjoyed a burger and eats steak “very seldom, but if served it I would eat it”. Topics Michael Bloomberg Democrats US elections 2020 US politics news

But the United States government finally released an official copy to the National Security Archive and in a new State Department history of the era published last month.In a 1989 oral history, Mr. Blood kept quiet about the possible change in the relationship. Instead, he focused on an episode earlier in the year when the United States ambassador to Afghanistan, Adolph “Spike” Dubs, was kidnapped in Kabul and killed during a rescue attempt.“Washington asked me to seek an appointment with Hafizullah Amin who was the president and the leader,” Mr. Blood, who died in 2004, said in the oral history. “About the only thing they wanted to tell him was that he couldn’t expect any resumption of aid until he could satisfy us about their role in Spike’s death.”Rodric Braithwaite, the last British ambassador to the Soviet Union and the author of “Afgantsy: The Russians in Afghanistan, 1979-89,” said on Monday that it had long been known that the Kremlin worried that Mr. Amin was turning to the United States, but said Soviet leaders had multiple motives for the invasion.“It’s difficult to weight all the considerations,” he said, “but the Russians’ main concern was to ensure that a country on their vulnerable southern border, which they had cultivated for decades, didn’t become hostile.”The Kremlin was also angered that Mr. Amin had not only toppled President Noor Muhammad Taraki, who had its backing, but had him killed. On Dec. 12, 1979, the Politburo approved a miliary intervention with no debate as Mr. Brezhnev and the others signed a handwritten decision memo titled “On the Situation in ‘A.’”The Soviets tried to kill Mr. Amin only to botch it. The day after the “A” memo was signed, a K.G.B. operative slipped poison into his Coca-Cola, but the carbonation diluted the toxic agent. A couple of weeks later, the K.G.B. poisoned his food, but the Soviet Embassy in Afghanistan, unaware of the plot, sent doctors to save him. Only when thousands of Soviet troops poured into Afghanistan did they finally dispatch the troublesome leader, this time during crossfire.The invasion was intended to be a quick operation, as in Hungary in 1956 and Czechoslovakia in 1968. But resistance to the Soviets was fierce and unrelenting. The realignment Mr. Blood broached took place as a result, with the United States coming to the aid of the Afghan rebels. It was, however, a realignment that would not last.

India’s natural gas-based power plants have been reeling under an unexpected decline in domestic production and the high cost of imports. A parliamentary panel has now pinned the blame on the government.Gas-based power plants in the country have an installed power generation capacity of 24.867 gigawatts (GW), over half of which is lying idle as production has been declining since the financial year ended March 2012.For this, the parliament’s standing committee on energy’s report dated Jan. 04 has blamed the government’s unforeseen lowering of domestic production forecasts, which it says has left the gas-based power plants stranded.“[T]hese power plants were planned with the expectation of considerable increase in the volume of domestic gas production, particularly from KG D6 field. But the projections regarding availability of domestic gas have turned out to be terribly wrong,” the report says.The key reason for the wrong projections has been a decline in production from the Krishna Godavari Dhirubhai 6 (KG D6) gas reserve block. Situated in the Bay of Bengal, the KG D6 block is jointly operated by Reliance Industries and BP. The block was touted as India’s largest deposit of natural gas, and the government expected it to contribute up to a quarter of India’s gas supply.But in 2012, Reliance announced a cut in the block’s estimated reserves. Steadily, gas flow has since declined to practically zero, according to the ministry of petroleum and natural gas.In the absence of domestic production, power plants can’t import natural gas as it would more than double their costs. Cheaper tariffs from other sources of power—coal, solar, wind, and hydro—mean that the gas-based plants can’t pass on these costs without losing their competitiveness.The parliamentary panel also criticised the government’s decisions in 2013 and 2014 to prioritise the supply of natural gas to the transport industry over power plants, which further starved them of whatever amount was being produced domestically. “The committee are of the view that these policy flip-flops crippled the gas-based power plants consequently making them stranded,” the report says. “These plants are now unable to service their debt obligations and are on the verge of becoming NPAs (non-performing assets).” Banks have invested about Rs50,000 crores ($7.18 billion) in these projects, according to the panel’s report. “The committee feel that since this stranded gas-based capacity involves a significant amount of public money, it can not be allowed to become junk.”“Since these gas-based power plants were set up on the basis of the government’s assurance regarding supply of gas, it becomes incumbent upon the government to help them come out of stress,” it says.The report advocates prioritising the supply of gas to power plants. Prime minister Narendra Modi’s government is bound to find it uncomfortable as it has pushed gas as a cleaner alternative to gasoline and diesel in the transport industry.In November, Modi had announced his vision for “a gas-based economy,” with a target of raising the number of filling stations for compressed natural gas (CNG) to 10,000 in the next decade. The country presently has 1,470 CNG stations. His government is also under pressure to reduce India’s growing reliance on fossil fuel imports. It is unlikely that the power sector can be prioritised without hurting the targets for the transport industry while still keeping imports from rising. The report asks the ministry of power to subsidise natural gas imports to reduce costs for the stranded plants. It cautions against ongoing discussions within the government to deregulate prices of domestically produced gas, which is currently priced according to a formula that is criticised by producers such as BP.“The committee are of the opinion that because of shortage in availability of gas and demand being much higher than supply, the free-market pricing will result in exorbitant prices,” the report says.In a silver lining, however, the government expects a significant jump in the domestic production of gas to over 60 billion cubic meters by the financial year 2022. “The committee hope that this time the ministry has made a realistic assessment unlike in the case of KG D6,” the report says.

Google 再度入华的消息传出半年之后，终于尘埃落定。据英国媒体 The Intercept 报道，Google 已经关闭了代号为「蜻蜓」（dragonfly）的数据分析系统。Google 曾试图基于这一系统开发一个可以进行内容审核、过滤的搜索引擎，特供中国。今年 8 月，关于 Google 即将重返中国市场并提供搜索服务的消息一时间甚嚣尘上。这一消息最初来自 Google 内部文件和知情人士的爆料，消息称 Google 正在开发一个「能够符合中国法律规定」的搜索引擎，项目代号为「蜻蜓」。当时的消息称，相关的 App 最快会在 6 - 9 个月内上线。但还没有等到 6 个月，Google 就已经停止了这一项目。故事要从 10 年前开始说起。2008 年，在 Google 还没有退出中国市场的时候，它从「域名大王」蔡文胜手上买下了 265.com 这个域名，并用它做了一个类似 hao123 的「网址导航」。和 hao123 一样，265.com 也在页面的显著位置提供搜索服务。用户输入关键词，发送搜索请求，265.com 会返回 Google 的搜索结果。之后，Google 退出中国，但 265.com 并没有完全停止运营，直到现在都可以正常访问，只是一切搜索请求会被重定向到百度。所以在 Google 搜索撤出中国大陆的这些年里，它仍能通过 265.com 收集大量的搜索请求数据，并将这些数据用于了市场研究。据 Google 内部的知情人士透露，「蜻蜓」项目的开发人员获得了一个庞大的数据库，里面全是 Google 从 265.com 上收集的中国用户的搜索请求。而且还有工程师获得了相关 API 接口的权限，可以直接从 265.com 上获取实时的相关数据。「蜻蜓」项目工程师的日常工作就是通过 265.com 上的这些搜索数据来了解中国人平时都搜索些什么关键词，测试在 Google 上搜索这些关键词会得到哪些结果。然后将这些搜索结果放到一个叫「BeaconTower」的工具中进行检查，检查这些网站是不是「能在中国大陆合法访问」的网站。通过这个方法，Google 建立起了一张「不合法网站」的名单，然后就可以将这个「黑名单」整合进「蜻蜓」系统中，进而在搜索引擎里屏蔽掉那些非法的搜索结果。消息从 Google 内部爆出，也因为内部的压力而被迫叫停。Google 内部的政策和规定是，任何数据收集工作都应经过公司的「隐私团队」审核，确保用户的相关权利没有被侵犯，且没有任何违反用户协议的地方，借此规避相关的法律风险。但在「蜻蜓」项目中收集数据的行为，Google 管理层一直没有向隐私团队公开。这让隐私团队「非常生气」，经过内部讨论，「蜻蜓」项目的工程师被告知不能再使用 265.com 上获得的数据进行相关的开发。几周前，「蜻蜓」项目团队开始对来自 Google 本站上的搜索请求数据进行相关的数据挖掘和开发，因为 Google 本站上的搜索请求数据在获取和使用上完全合法，也合乎 Google 的内部规程。但这些搜索请求大多来自那些居住在海外的华人，跟中国本土用户的使用习惯仍有很大的不同，「曲线救国」的方式让「蜻蜓」项目的开发效率和过滤内容的准确度大大降低。据两位熟悉这个计划的消息人士透露，「蜻蜓」项目事件的持续发酵，在 Google 内部引发了激烈的反响，以至于管理层和员工之间产生了裂痕。有几组工程师在了解了相关情况后，离开了「蜻蜓」项目组。Yonatan Zunger，一名曾在 Google 工作了 14 年的资深工程师表示，他去年在「蜻蜓」项目组工作了几个月，这个项目从一开始就非常特殊，保密级别很高，并且从一开始就被 Google「区别对待」。「Google 中国分部和『蜻蜓』项目的负责人似乎并不怎么关心安全、隐私这些问题」，Zunger 说，「Google 的法律和隐私团队需要有权质疑他们的产品决策，并保证能和他们保持一种公开对抗的关系」。之后，相关员工在内部发起了一项投诉，称 Google 对员工隐瞒了关于这个项目的具体细节，员工在开发的过程中并不知道「自己在做的东西将被用于何处」。这件事最终对包括 Google CEO Sundar Pichai 在内的管理层造成了巨大打击，因为他们在过去两年内一直将「重返中国市场」当作一个重要的「大事」，给了它非常高的优先级。上周，Google CEO Sundar Pichai 在美国国会接受问询，过程中也有议员针对「蜻蜓」项目提出了疑问。Sundar 回应说，现在暂时没有在中国推出搜索引擎的计划，但也不能完全否定未来的可能性。Google 最初的目标是在 2019 年 1 月到 4 月期间正式推出「蜻蜓」系统，但来自内部和外部的双重压力已经迫使公司管理层搁置这一项目。最终，「蜻蜓」项目停摆，Google 入华的希望再度破灭，至少在短期内是这样。参考链接：头图来源：Flickr责任编辑：宋德胜

“Is our life just worth one photo?”The question was posted in March on an Instagram account shared by a young couple named Vishnu and Meenakshi Moorthy, two software engineers and travel bloggers from India who had been living and working in Silicon Valley.This Instagram post showing a picture of Meenakshi Moorthy, taken by her husband Vishnu, asked: “Is our life just worth one photo?” Months later, they would both be dead.The post showed Meenakshi sitting on the edge of a rock over the Grand Canyon with the caption, in part: “A lot of us including yours truly is a fan of daredevilry attempts of standing at the edge of cliffs and skyscrapers . . . Is our life just worth one photo?”In October, they were killed by an 800-foot fall at Yosemite National Park, an accident that occurred while they were on the edge of a cliff and probably taking pictures for Instagram.The Moorthys’ fairy-tale life ended tragically. But their story is part of a growing and dangerous trend in the global contest for social media fame.A subculture has emerged in the past eight years of people who seek out death-defying situations–and they do it for the likes, followers, and adulation of fans on social media.How it all beganIn 2011, a Canadian named Tom Ryaboi dangled his feet over the edge of a tall building in Toronto and took a picture straight down. He posted it on Flickr, Reddit, and 500px. The picture was a viral hit.Ryaboi titled his image, “I’ll make you famous.” But the picture made him famous–and also helped to spread the phenomenon of “rooftopping,” in which people climb as high as they can on a building or tower.Rooftopping had existed for years as an obscure branch of urban hacking. But the social internet transformed these pursuits from private thrill seeking into a genre of public photography and video. The adrenaline rush was still part of the idea. But so were the clicks, likes, subscribers, and even income.With “I’ll make you famous,” a new kind of social media star was born: the social media daredevil. In 2014, Vitaliy Raskalov and Vadim Makhorov climbed the Shanghai Tower. Their GoPro video of the stunt now has more than 73 million views.After that event, a new generation of Instagrammers, YouTubers, and members of other social networks began to cultivate the craft of risking life and limb to post heart-pounding pictures and videos of dangerous stunts. Risk-taking social media photography deaths and injuries roughly tripled in number from the beginning of 2014 to the end of 2015, according to media analysis conducted by researchers in Turkey.The stunts take many forms: posing on tall buildings or high cliffs; reckless activity on, in, near, or under trains, cars, or motorcycles; interaction with wild animals; all manner of dangerous jackassery (you know, for the LOLs); extreme eating; and more.It’s easy to dismiss the trend as the folly of reckless youth. But some of the images are breathtakingly beautiful. The photographs and videos on Russian model Angela Nikolau’s Instagram feed, for example are stunning in part because of the danger. View this post on Instagram Что мною движет в этой жизни? Желание быть лучшей в начатом мною деле. Если ты спросишь меня, кто я по профессии и кем же я мечтаю стать? в свои 25 лет я отвечу – «не знаю!» Все идёт по плану, я развиваюсь в разных направлениях деятельности, пробуя эту жизнь на вкус как и @_naturerush_ , который заряжает меня на новые свершения. #Naturerush #Твоянатуральнаяэнергия A post shared by A N G E L A N I K O L A U (@angela_nikolau) on Dec 15, 2018 at 6:58am PST Like Nikolau, many of these social media risk-takers are practiced and skillful.Some of their imitators–not so much.Rising fatalitiesA study published in the Journal of Family Medicine and Primary Care found that some 259 people died taking selfies between October 2011 and November 2017.Journalists have covered this report extensively. But the number can mislead.As psychologist and author Tracy P. Alloway told me, many of those included in that figure weren’t habitual social media risk takers or rising social media stars, but regular people who happened to be killed while taking selfies during unusual circumstances.Wikipedia actually keeps a list of people killed or nearly killed while trying to take selfies. Most of these deaths were not habitual social media risk takers.For example, a man named Prabhu Bhatara was returning home from a wedding in the Indian state of Odisha when he spotted a bear. Against the advice of his friends, he decided to take a selfie with the animal in the background. Tragically, he was mauled to death by the bear, which added a number to the statics around “selfie deaths.” But Bhatara was not a social media thrill seeker, just an ordinary person who made an unfortunate choice.It’s also true that many people who do engage in frequent risk taking for social media aren’t taking selfies–they’re the models if you will, photographed by others–and as such, fatalities in this category aren’t counted as “selfie deaths.”And finally, the number counted in the death-by-selfie study was based on media reports. Some selfie-related deaths go unreported.The bottom line is that we don’t really know how many people have died in recent years due to the risk-taking social trend, just that fatalities and injuries are on the rise. Still, the selfie-death studies are a reasonable proxy for the trend and our best source of hard data.The leading cause of death while taking selfies is drowning, followed by transportation (trains and cars), and then falling from high places.Social media risk-taking culture varies by nation. More than half of all global selfie deaths happen in India. (The top four nations for selfie deaths, according to the report are, in order: India, Russia, the United States, and Pakistan.) The majority of Indians who die while trying to capture photos for social do so by falling off high places. Many other such deaths involve “train surfing” (a phenomenon so big in India that National Geographic covered it).In the U.S., as one might predict, the majority of such deaths are by firearms. A video news report posted on YouTube recently showed a man at a gun range pointing his gun at a friend for a selfie before a range safety officer skillfully intervened.YouTube and some other social sites have witnessed wave after wave of dangerous “challenges” since 2014, including the “Fire Challenge” (where people set themselves on fire), the “Tide Pod Challenge,” and others. These “challenges” are clearly driven by social media imitation and competition.Other social media-driven stunts include dangerous driving or riding a bike or motorcycle; climbing on or touching power lines; posing on railroad tracks; posing with guns, grenades, or other weapons; and posing on beaches or on rocks with large waves.Some of those killed had large social followings: Popular rooftoppers Wu Yongning and Andrey Retrovsky, for example, all had big followings and died in the pursuit of risk taking for social fame. So did YouTube stars Ryker Gamble, Alexey Lyakh, and Megan Scraper, who were participants in a popular gonzo travel YouTube channel and Instagram account called High On Life.The channel features a lot of relatively safe leisure activities in exotic locations, but also risky stunts such as diving off rooftops into swimming pools, kayaking down sewage drains, and alligator wrestling. The trio was killed after Scraper slipped off a waterfall and fell into a dangerous pool below in British Columbia. Gamble and Lyakh died trying to save her.Canadian rapper Jon James, who performed risky stunts in his music videos–essentially integrating the social media risk-taker subculture into his performances–fell to his death in October during a video shoot on an airplane wing.While social media stars sometimes die in the act, it’s possible that the larger problem is the audience that copies what they see on social networks.George Kourounis, an extreme weather “chaser” and presenter on the TV series Angry Planet, knows a thing or two about risking life and limb for video. His Twitter profile picture is a selfie he took in front of some extremely dangerous lava.The selfie was shot inside Marum Crater on Ambrym Island in Vanuatu. The spot was so hot that without his protective suit, he would have survived there only a few seconds. And it partly melted the outside of his video camera. Kourounis told me that fans try to copy some of his exploits. He says he can’t stop people from doing that, but hopes they take safety as seriously as he does. Volcano #selfie. When normal selfies are not extreme enough! pic.twitter.com/hSRWPDjfDX — George Kourounis (@georgekourounis) August 28, 2014Life-threatening stunts are obviously reckless and dangerous. But there’s another big problem.Danger worksA British YouTuber named Jay Swingler performed a dangerous stunt about a year ago. He placed a plastic bag with a breathing tube over his head, then “glued” his head to the inside of a microwave oven with expanding plaster. The plaster set, and Swingler couldn’t get his head out of the microwave. It took a team of paramedics to set him free.Dumb, right? But Swingler was rewarded with 70,000 new subscribers over the next three days after posting. Today, the video has more than 5.7 million views, and Swingler’s channel “TGFbro” enjoys 4.5 million subscribers. He now monetizes his YouTube channel in part with merchandise, including hats and hoodies that say “Childish.”Some do it for the thrills or art, and some do it for the LOLs. YouTuber Jay Swingler plastered his head into a microwave, after which his subscriber count increased by 70,000 in three days. [Screenshot: TGFbro]Others are cashing in on the aesthetic of risk-taking social influencers. A clothing company called Breach Apparel calls their products “functional garms for the movers, adventurers, and explorers,” and their models appear in rooftopping and parkour situations.Ricky D. Crano, a lecturer in the department of English at Tufts University, told me that dangerous images posted on social media represent “a clear-cut case of market forces driving high-risk selfie publicity, a quintessential model of personhood for the digital age: the individual as entrepreneur of one’s self.”Risk taking becomes part of one’s personal brand. “We must compete with others just to be seen–that is, for the algorithm to favor our post,” says Crano.But the rewards are also internal. Psychologist Alloway told me that the driving forces for the posting of images showing the self in danger may be identical to other social media actions, such as addictive posting, constant selfie taking, and others. People post danger images because of narcissism and identity. Narcissists, for example, may feel “immune to the laws of nature,” according to Alloway.Danger posts offer a double dose of dopamine–a reward for the risk taking, then another reward for the social rewards of likes, clicks, subscriptions, and followers.Steve Stewart-Williams, author of the book The Ape That Understood the Universe, agrees that the motivations are pretty banal. People like to show off and fit in, and some crave an adrenaline rush.Deliberate risk taking for an audience may be rooted in our evolutionary past, according to Stewart-Williams. “On average, men engage in more risky behavior–more showing off–than women, especially in early adulthood,” he says. “This is common in species where the maximum number of offspring for males is higher than that for females.” In prehistoric human societies, “The men who had the most offspring were those who took greater risks in the pursuit of status and prestige”–the Paleolithic equivalent of followers and likes.The backlash arrivesPolice in some locations are cracking down on risky photography for public safety. Ryaboi told me that Hong Kong in particular has become more strict.Ryaboi himself was arrested in 2015 during a rooftopping jaunt in Toronto. He said that police tried to make an example of him by publicizing his arrest, but that it only made rooftopping more popular in Canada. Police dropped the charges.The Indian state of Goa and other locations are establishing signed “no selfie zones,” but their effectiveness is questionable. And the Russian Interior Ministry has even produced a leaflet and PSA video and website warning about the danger of risky social media photography and videography. “A cool selfie could cost you your life,” it says, along with a host of stick-figure examples of how someone might die while trying to capture a thrilling selfie. View this post on Instagram ???? #urbex #urbexworld #urbexpeople #train #rail #mdz #zcp4 #зцпч #зацепинг #зацеперы #зацепер #ярославскоенаправление #щелково3 #чкаловская #бахчиванджи #москва #moscow #russia #cppk #цппк #ржд #ржд???? A post shared by ⚜️ K O B Z A R R O ⚜️ (@kobzarro) on Sep 20, 2017 at 6:55am PDT Some thrill-seeking social starts have been jailed or fined. One Russian Instagrammer and YouTuber uses the nom de stunt Kobzarro and wears a mask to conceal her identity. She says she started train surfing at the age of 15.Is social networking to blame?Stewart-Williams says that social media amplifies ordinary social competition, which can drive people to extremes. “Instead of just competing with the people around you, you’re potentially competing with anyone anywhere in the world,” he says. Worse, “the videos that go viral are the ones that are most extreme, so you’re competing with the most extreme risk takers on the planet.”Crano says that “these incentives to ‘win’ at social media are a product of design and not an accident of social media platforms like Facebook, Instagram, and Twitter.” The incentives are “baked right in” and “essential to their corporate revenue generation.”“The case for corporate responsibility here is a strong one,” he adds. But it’s “easy to refute such claims with counterclaims prioritizing shareholder responsibility.”A Google spokesperson who works on YouTube policy told me that YouTube maintains policies against the depiction of harmful activities on the site. Google considers whether the people taking risks are trained or professional and are taking precautions, whether the act can be easily copied by minors, and whether the videos are educational, documentary, scientific, or artistic in nature.For example, YouTube might delete content showing someone pointing a loaded gun at someone else while taking a selfie. But it would allow a TV news report that included the same video (as per my example above).Google develops its policies in consultation with psychologists, pediatricians, emergency room doctors, and others.Similarly, Twitter prohibits self-harm or encouraging others to hurt themselves. Dangerous “challenges” such as the “Tide Pod Challenge” are against Twitter’s rules. The company requires such tweets to be deleted; after repeated violations, it will suspend accounts. A Twitter spokesperson told me that Twitter’s policies are constantly changing as user behavior change and trends emerge.Facebook, which owns Instagram, did not respond to my requests for an interview.Hemank Lamba, one of the researchers on a project involving one American and two Indian universities, called, “From Camera to Deathbed: Understanding Dangerous Selfies on Social Media,” told me that the best solution is to increase awareness about the risks.Technology can help. “We are experimenting with technology-based interventions” that use a camera feed to identify when the user is in danger, such as at a higher elevation or close to an approaching vehicle,” he says. The technology uses deep learning to identify pictures that depict life-threatening situations.It’s easy to imagine that social sites like Twitter, Facebook, or Instagram might some day use technology like this to flag photos and videos that are taken in life-threatening situations. In the meantime, risk taking for social media fame is getting more extreme, and the number of fatalities seem to be on the rise. As the public slowly begins to understand the potential harm of social media–the addiction, the loss of time, the risk of depression–our best hope is that it also takes notice of the physical danger it can engender.

Back in 2014, when the Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP) ascended to power in India, it did so on the promise of running an open government accountable to its citizens that would eliminate corruption. But nearly five years later, and with an election due between March and May, the track record of Narendra Modi’s government on upholding citizens’ right to information has raised doubts about its commitment to accountability.The BJP’s predecessors, the United Progressive Alliance (UPA) government, led by the Indian National Congress party, were instrumental in passing the Right to Information (RTI) law in 2005. Its aim was to undo the culture of bureaucratic secrecy encouraged by the colonial Official Secrets Act of 1923.For the first time, the law compelled government departments to provide official information in the form of records or documents to citizens when specific requests were made. This helped to expose corruption in government as state authorities could no longer hide information on the way they made decisions, or spent taxpayer’s money. The exposés contributed to the UPA government’s political downfall at the 2014 elections.Yet, ever since the RTI law was passed, successive governments have sought to suppress it one way or another. In recent years, public authorities affiliated to the central government have denied information to citizens under the law on matters of vital public interest.Take, for instance, the case of demonetisation, in which the government pulled high-value currency notes out of circulation in 2016. It said the move was aimed at eradicating fake currency notes circulating in the economy, but demonetisation led to a severe cash crunch that had spiralling effects on jobs and economic growth.When citizens filed RTI appeals with the Reserve Bank of India (RBI) about demonetisation, they were refused information on a range of queries from who had been consulted to the reasons behind the move and the cost incurred by scrapping the banned notes. The central bank took refuge under the law’s exemption clause, which states that exemptions can be sought for information if disclosure would “prejudicially affect the sovereignty and integrity of India, the security, strategic, scientific or economic interests of the state, relation with foreign state or lead to incitement of an offence.” While it’s up to the public information officer of each institution to decide on exemptions, these decisions can be appealed to the Central Information Commission (CIC), which settles information disputes.But such denial of information amounts to a failure to come clean on a controversial decision that affected the lives of ordinary citizens in a big way. It’s not even clear whether demonetisation’s stated motive of removing fake notes was actually achieved.Another important ongoing case of denial of information regards a list of wilful loan defaulters held by the RBI. This came at a time when the Indian government has been struggling to extradite businessmen who fled the country after defaulting on billions of dollars of bank loans. After the CIC ordered the RBI to release information on the loan defaulters, the central bank went to court in mid December to get a stay order, denying the release.India’s supreme court had already pulled up the RBI back in 2015 over its in-house “disclosure policy,” which violated provisions under the RTI law. The court ruled in favour of making disclosures, but the central bank has continued to deny information requests on matters of vital public interest.In 2017, the Indian Air Force also denied an RTI request and refused to release crucial information related to the pricing of a deal for 36 Rafale aircrafts finalised between India and France, that has currently snowballed into a major corruption scandal.Another controversy pertains to the prime minister’s educational qualifications. In 2015, when Neeraj Sharma, an IT professional from Delhi, sought to verify Modi’s 1968 BA degree results from Delhi University—mentioned in his election affidavit—the information was expressly denied. When the CIC directed the university to disclose the information, the university went to the high court demanding a stay on the disclosure order.The university publicly confirmed Modi’s degree was authentic, but still refuses to make the details accessible under the RTI. The legal case drags on, with the next hearing due in early 2019. Requests for the release of details of the prime minister’s MA degree from Gujarat University were also denied under the RTI law.In November 2016, the supreme court upheld citizens’ right to know about the educational background of people contesting polls and held that the election of those lying in their affidavits could be set aside.Besides denying information, the BJP government has also proposed amendments to the RTI law, in which the central government seeks to control the salaries and tenures of the information commissioners. The effect would be to erode the independence of the information commissions at the national level and in India’s states. It is the information commissions—which are vested with court-like powers to adjudicate information appeals denied by government departments—that actually give the law its teeth.Since coming to office in 2014, the BJP government has delayed making crucial appointments to the CIC as vacancies have arisen and, as the end of 2018 approached, eight of the 11 posts for information commissioner were vacant. After activists went to the supreme court to demand speedy appointments to the commission, in late December the government announced the appointment of a new chief information commissioner and four new information commissioners. While RTI activists hailed this as a small victory following months of protests, the government has refused to divulge information on the process adopted for vetting applicants for the job.At present more than 26,000 information appeals lie pending before the commission, delaying availability of information to thousands of citizens using the RTI. The government has also dragged information commissioners to court. This is a clear case of intimidation of commissioners aimed at discouraging them from ordering disclosures of information that the government finds inconvenient.Back in 2005, when India passed the RTI law, it was heralded as a revolutionary move to empower the people to hold those in power to account. But that task has been easier said than done. As India awaits yet another electoral battle later in 2019, the incumbent government has clearly failed to deliver on its promise of accountability.Vidya Venkat, PhD scholar in social anthropology, SOAS, University of London. This article is republished from The Conversation under a Creative Commons licence. Read the original article. We welcome your comments at ideas.india@qz.com.

Two women who defied protesters to enter one of Hinduism's holiest temples say they have no fear of mobs enraged by their actions.Kanaka Durga, 39, and Bindu Ammini, 40, made history by entering Sabarimala shrine in India's Kerala state on Wednesday, sparking protests.The women told the BBC they felt it necessary to uphold women's rights.In September the Indian Supreme Court said the temple's ban against women of menstruating age was discriminatory.Hinduism regards menstruating women as unclean and bars them from participating in religious rituals - but most temples allow women to enter as long as they are not menstruating at the time. Some protesters argue that the court ruling goes against the wishes of the temple's deity, Lord Ayappa, and reacted angrily. How a Temple divided India's women Mob attacks women near Sabarimala temple The Indian god who bars women from his temple Since then women have had their entry blocked in defiance to the ruling, and even been subjected to violence.After prolonged resistance, Ms Ammini and Ms Durga successfully entered under nightfall alongside plain-clothed police officers on Wednesday. After they entered, thousands protesting put Kerala state into virtual lockdown.Right-wing groups, supported by India's ruling Hindu nationalist Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP), demanded a state-wide shutdown, and businesses and transportation became paralysed.Across the state hundreds were arrested, and at least one person was killed in clashes. Speaking to BBC Hindi's Imran Qureshi from a secret location on Friday, Ms Ammini, a law teacher, said she felt it was important for her to visit the shrine in order to uphold "constitutional principles" and "constitutional morality" within India."Gender justice is a big issue facing our society, and the implementation of this judgement helps to implement gender justice," she said of their visit."I may be killed by the people," she said, of the protest response. But Ms Ammini maintained she "had no fear" of the angry mobs.The sentiment was shared by Ms Durga. "I am not afraid. But every time women make any progress, society has always made a lot of noise," she told the BBC.A religious devotee, she wanted to visit Sabarimala and pray to the deity, Ms Durga said.The site, which attracts millions of visitors every year, is one of the most prominent in the country. "Even though I believe in God, I am a person who feels there are some practices that have to change," she said.Her view echoes that of Chief Justice Dipak Misra. Handing down the ruling in September, he said religion stood for "dignity and identity" and women should have equal right to practice it. Despite the protests, Ms Durga says she will return to the site next year. The issue has become increasingly contentious in India in the run-up to a general election, which is due to be held by May.The Kerala state government, run by Chief Minister Pinarayi Vijayan, supports the court verdict and has vowed to provide protection.Critics have accused Indian Prime Minister Narendra Modi of pursuing a religiously divisive agenda on the issue to court the BJP's mostly-Hindu support base.A day before Ms Ammini and Ms Durga were able to enter, a 620km (385-mile) human chain of women was organised in support. After two days of protest in the aftermath, only small demonstrations were reported across Kerala on Friday. "Overall, the situation is calm, especially around the Sabarimala temple where large number of devotees continue to visit," police spokesman VP Pramod Kumar told AFP news agency. Reports suggest a third woman may now have also entered the temple on Thursday, escorted by her husband and under police protection.

As Britain begins separating from the European Union (EU) on March 29 this year, Indian students have reasons to rejoice.The UK’s leading universities are likely to try to recruit many more overseas students, particularly from China and India, to offset a series of financial challenges arising from Brexit, Sir Anton Muscatelli, vice-chancellor of Glasgow University and chairman of the Russell Group, told daily newspaper the Times (paywall). The Russell Group represents 24 public research universities in the UK, including King’s College, Imperial College, and the London School of Economics, among others.“Many universities will try to do this because it will be the only way to respond to a sudden fall in income,” Muscatelli said.Glasgow University will likely increase its composition of overseas students to make up half of the total, reported the Times, while University College London (UCL) will also up its foreign students to 50% and cut down on enrollments from home. International students already pay upwards of £12,000 annually, and a government review could slice tuition fees for local students down to £6,500 (Rs5.8 lakh) from £9,250, making international students more lucrative than before.In the wake of Brexit, EU students will no longer be given preferential treatment.“…we bring free movement to an end, different rules to the current ones must apply to migration here by EU citizens,” home secretary Sajid Javid said in a white paper published on Dec. 19. Instead, the UK will move towards a “skills-based” immigration system.With the new rules slated to come into force by 2021, British universities are worried about the fate of their 50,000 EU staff and 130,000 EU students. “University leaders are united in the view that the UK leaving the EU without a deal is one of the biggest threats our universities have ever faced,” a collective of over 150 higher-education providers warned in a Jan. 04 open letter to politicians. The collective included Universities UK, the Russell Group, Guild HE, Million Plus, and University Alliance.They wrote:Vital research links will be compromised, from new cancer treatments to technologies combatting climate change. The valuable exchange of students, staff and knowledge would be seriously damaged. And we share the concerns of business about the impact of no deal on everything from supply chains to security and travel. It is no exaggeration to suggest that this would be an academic, cultural and scientific setback from which it would take decades to recover.Already the adverse impact of the uncertainty caused by Brexit is showing in enrollments, according to data from Russell Group universities. Postgraduate enrollments dropped 9% for the ongoing academic year.For non-EU foreign students, this is good news for two reasons.One, they can now apply to colleges on a level playing field with their EU counterparts and stand an equal chance of securing a spot. Secondly, to make up for the slowdown in enrollments from EU member states, students from India and China are being welcomed with open arms.Beyond colleges, even the job market will become easier to crack.International students at British universities will be given six months’ post-study leave, “giving them more time to find permanent skilled work and to work temporarily during that period,” Javid wrote. “Those who have completed a PhD will have a year.” Of course, the minimum salary threshold remains at £30,000, and businesses still have to shell out thousands of pounds to sponsor workers, but at least citizens from EU nations won’t be favoured over other foreigners.