Connect with us

Tech

Facebook claims that Instagram is not harmful to teenagers,’ despite a damning WSJ report

Published

on

Facebook claims that Instagram is not harmful to teenagers,' despite a damning WSJ report

The allegations are in response to a shocking Wall Street Journal story that caused a Senate hearing.

Facebook has responded almost two months after The Wall Street Journal published that Instagram caused body image issues to be more severe for one-third of teens, by Facebook’s statistics. The attack is courtesy of Pratiti Raychoudhury, who is Vice President and Head of Research at Facebook. Raychoudhury’s blog post on Facebook’s Newsroom declares that the Wall Street Journal‘s characterization of internal research is “not accurate” and blames the whole thing for a poor interpretation of the information the newspaper has available.

September 14, On September 14, the Wall Street Journal published an article on The Facebook Files, which is a collection of stories built around massive archive documents from internal Facebook documents, which were leaked to the media. The story of September 14 was focused on the data that suggested that Instagram could hurt teenagers, particularly teenagers. The newspaper stated that Facebook was aware of the adverse effects its products caused to adolescents and “has made minimal efforts to address these issues and plays them down in public.”

Facebook has been quiet about the content of the study mentioned by The WSJ. But the Facebook’s global head of security, Antigone Davis, is scheduled to testify before the Senate Commerce Subcommittee Thursday to address the allegations that are made in the report as well as plans for an updated “Instagram for kids”. Raychoudhury specifically mentions the hearing as the basis for the article.

Advertisement

Raychoudhury omits a lot of concerns in the article by the WSJ. She doesn’t address many of the issues raised in the article, such as that teens said they were dependent on Instagram. Instead, she concentrates her efforts on sabotaging Facebook’s research. A lot of news outlet‘s most damning assertions, according to Raychoudhury, are based on a study with just 40 participants. This is a tiny number of participants by any standard, especially when it’s an app with over 1 billion users. The study, which was a mere 0.2 per cent of its size, is “designed to inform internal conversations about teens’ most negative perceptions of Instagram,” Raychoudhury said.

Raychoudhury has also taken umbrage at the news outlet WSJ that referred to an internal Facebook presentation that says, “we make body images worse for 1 in 3 teenage girls”. Raychoudhury frequently points out that body image was only one of the twelve possible problems that Instagram can make more difficult for teenagers. “Body image was the only area where teen girls who reported struggling with the issue said Instagram made it worse as compared to the other 11 areas,” she writes.

However, neither Facebook, Instagram, or Raychoudhury have provided the actual data she has repeatedly mentioned in her responses to The Wall Street Journal‘s coverage. Without having access to the data, it’s tough to evaluate the Wall Street Journal‘s or Raychoudhury’s interpretations of the data. But remember that this isn’t the first moment we’ve seen or heard concerning these issues.

Advertisement
Continue Reading
Advertisement
Click to comment

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published.

Tech

Clubhouse removed personal information from Afghan users’ accounts as a security measure

Published

on

By

Clubhouse removed personal information from Afghan users' accounts as a security measure techydeed.com

The platform aims to protect users’ privacy and security.

Clubhouse, a social audio app, has joined other social networks in protecting the privacy and security of Afghan users. The platform reset the bios and photos of tens to thousands of Afghan users earlier this week and made it more difficult for search engines to find their accounts. Clubhouse spokesperson said that the actions did not affect users’ followers and that all changes can be reversed if desired.

Clubhouse reminds its Afghan customers that pseudonyms are allowed for safety and human rights reasons. According to the spokesperson, Clubhouse consulted experts in violent extremism and free expression to develop its approach.

Advertisement

As the Taliban have regained control of the country, many people in Afghanistan have tried to delete photos from their social media accounts and phones that could show a connection to the West or the former Afghan government.

Despite bans on several social platforms, the Taliban was able to push their messaging on social media. The Washington Post said that they have become sophisticated at social media tactics to change their image.

On Thursday, Facebook said it had added security measures for users in Afghanistan, including hiding “friends” lists and adding a tool to lock down accounts quickly.

Advertisement
Continue Reading

Tech

It’s not a good idea to overthink it. Elon Musk’s Tesla Bot jokes

Published

on

By

It's not a good idea to overthink it. Elon Musk's Tesla Bot jokes techydeed.com

A distraction and an empty promise

After a lengthy presentation on the unquestionably remarkable work, Tesla is doing in AI, Elon Musk, the company’s Technoking, brought out a spandex-clad dancer to cap the evening. Behold, said Musk: my Tesla Bot.

He said that the dancer in the suit was the model for the new humanoid robot Tesla will be producing shortly. The applause and dubstep had subsided, and the briefing slides that promised that the Tesla Bot would stand at five feet eight inches (1.7m), be 125 pounds (56kg), and have “human-level hands” and be able to eliminate “dangerous and repetitive, boring tasks” were discarded.

A ROBOT IS A TESLA WITHOUT WHEELS. SAYS MUSK

Advertisement

Musk stated that Musk’s goal to build a human-replacement robotics system — something that no other company is even close to being able, was a natural step in Tesla’s efforts to develop self-driving cars. Musk said that cars are semi-sentient robots with wheels. It makes sense to add that to a humanoid body. We are also very skilled at actuators, batteries, and sensors, so we expect to have a prototype next year that looks something like this.

Also Read

Power Full Men Elon Musk Biography (1971–) 2021

Apple and Elon Musk deny that Tim Cook tried to replace them.

It was an extraordinary and brilliant piece of tomfoolery, even by Musk’s standards. A multipurpose sideshow that entertained Tesla skeptics and fed the fans while also creating headlines. The latter is particularly important in a week when most Tesla news has focused on a federal investigation into the company’s Autopilot software to crash into parked emergency vehicles. Musk says that all this is irrelevant. Just look at the man in the spandex suit. It’ll be an actual robot next year, I promise.

Advertisement

Are you willing to believe him? Do you think he is a fool? Although I can’t answer your question, I will give you the facts. Last night, Elon Musk took to the stage to promise that Tesla, a company with driver assistance software that cannot avoid parked ambulances reliably, would soon create a fully functioning humanoid robotic machine. Musk stated that the device would follow human instructions and respond correctly to commands such as “please go to the store and get me these groceries.” This was just minutes after he had shown a spandex-clad dancer demonstrating the Tesla Bot. You have to admire Musk’s chutzpah.

To help Musk understand his claims, it is important to remember that Boston Dynamics, which made Atlas, the most advanced bipedal robotic robot globally, has never called its machines anything other than R&D. It’s far from commercial deployment. In recent machine videos, the company showed how difficult building a bipedal robot is and how often Atlas trips and falls. Boston Dynamics has been working with Atlas and its bipedal predecessors for more than a decade. __S.50__

“[CALLING IT] HORSESHIT SOUNDS GENEROUS AND FRANKLY.”

Carl Berry, a UK University of Central Lancashire lecturer in robotics engineering, told me that “Calling it horse shit sounds generously honest.” Berry said that robotics and AI should not be used in manufacturing research.

He said that while he didn’t deny Tesla’s research into this topic was a bad thing, “but they and Boston Dynamics leave the public with unrealistic expectations about what robotics can do or will do for many years.”

Advertisement

I don’t doubt Musk can make something that looks like the Tesla Bot in 2022. It wouldn’t be hard to make a decent automaton — something on the level of Disney’s more advanced theme park models, for example. He can send it into space once he has it walking out on stage, just for the headlines. It will just be another distraction if he does. While robotics significantly impacts manufacturing, there is no reason to assume that robots don’t need to look like humans to do so.

Musk often uses this bait-and-switch method. Think about the changes Musk made to his Hyperloop plans over time. The technology was announced as a railgun-like train system that would move people from Los Angeles to San Francisco in less than half an hour. Over the years, these ambitions have shrunk until the project morphed into The Loop: a small tunnel that you can drive a car through if you want. Also known as A tunnel.

The Tesla Bot reminded me of Sophia, the automated chatbot who has appeared on magazine covers and chat shows. Sophia relies on misdirection to fool audiences and is a frequent target of AI experts’ scorn. It also has a job. As one of the robot’s creators, Ben Goertzel, told me in 2017, Sophia works by priming our imagination, encouraging us to fool ourselves into thinking the future is nearer than the evidence suggests. The robot generates news coverage and funding for its creators.

Goertzel stated, “If I tell people that I use probabilistic logic to reason on how to prune the backward-chaining inference trees in our logic engine,” They will feel more comfortable believing that AGI is possible if I show them a smiling robot face.

This is Musk’s goal, whether he is aiming to instill that feeling in investors or others. The Sophia strategy has a twist. Musk doesn’t need a simulacrum robot to sell his dream. He only needs a spandex-clad dancer. That’s innovation.

Advertisement

Continue Reading

Tech

OnlyFans has a new policy that bans sexually explicit Content

Published

on

By

OnlyFans has a new policy that bans sexually explicit Content techydeed.com

Masturbation and sex, actual or simulated, are not allowed.

On Thursday, the video and image sharing site OnlyFans announced plans to bans sexually explicit content” starting October 1. While we’re still not sure exactly why it’s changing so drastically, it just sent out an updated Terms of Service policy to the creators who’ve built the site detailing precisely what won’t be allowed going forward.

The new OnlyFans, Acceptable Use Policy, is visible when compared to the previous one.

You must not upload, post, or display Content on OnlyFans.

  • Promotes, advertises, or refers to “sexually explicit behavior,” which can be:
  • Actual or simulated sexual intercourse between any two persons, including oral-genital and anal-genital intercourses and genital-genital and oral-genital intercourses.
  • Actual or simulated masturbation
  • Any display of the anus and genitals of another person that is extreme or offensive
  • Actual or simulated material showing bodily fluids often secreted during sexual activity;
  • All Content that promotes, advertises, or refers to “sexually explicit behavior” must be deleted before December 1, 2021, or any other date we communicate to users.

The policy’s other sections that prohibit deepfakes, drug use, and violence are unchanged. The site sent an email to OnlyFans creators stating that Content containing nudity would be permitted as long as it was consistent with the policy. Posts may show body parts but not anything explicit. Your account may be suspended or terminated for any breach, as well as access to your earnings.

OnlyFans’ billion-dollar brand and business have been built mainly because onlyFans sex workers provide precisely the type of Content being banned. These content creators now have until December 1 to delete all traces of suddenly unacceptable Content from their profiles.

Advertisement

Continue Reading

Trending

Copyright © 2021 TechyDeed.

close