I'm really nervous about the idea that  we would be selling what amounts to

lib nft is an applied research project that  asks and seeks to answer a fundamental empirical   question can block tank blockchain technology  and nft specifically facilitate the economically   sustainable use storage long-term preservation and  accessibility of a library's special Collections

created an nft of a Nobel prize winning formula  by Jim Allison and they were able to sell that   for fifty thousand dollars as a singular item

I think we have a lot of  things in our collection that are undiscoverable

if you make a surrogate

the holders of the nfts  is to receive presents or gifts or perks that   Justin Bieber or whoever's managing I'm sure it's  not himself to them

we've digitized that surrogate and you  get into that and you buy that nft then you own a   piece of that right and it's identifiable to just  you

the blockchain itself has been proven to be  resilient against any kinds of attacks

is  there a way that we can use these collections   in a way that is driven by us from within  the library to create policies rules   Etc that allow us to turn these unique collections  that are already digitized in many cases or can   be into the nfts that we're talking about and then  find a way to maybe even monetize them

the underlying premise that we got to   is if libraries already working on digital asset  management and the blockchain is a way to manage   digital assets is there not a connection

At the cloud computing company VMWare, for example, writers use Jasper as they generate original content for marketing, from email to product campaigns to social media copy. Rosa Lear, director of product-led growth, said that Jasper helped the company ramp up our content strategy, and the writers now have time to do better research, ideation, and strategy.

Then, once a model generates content, it will need to be evaluated and edited carefully by a human. Alternative prompt outputs may be combined into a single document. Image generation may require substantial manipulation.

To start with, a human must enter a prompt into a generative model in order to have it create content. Generally speaking, creative prompts yield creative outputs. “Prompt engineer” is likely to become an established profession, at least until the next generation of even smarter AI emerges.

"HEAL jobs." So that's 'health, education, administration, and literacy.' Almost, if you like, the opposite side of the coin to STEM jobs- and that's where a lot of the jobs are coming from.

we've also seen a drop in the acquisition of skills, the kinds of skills and education that boys and men need. If boys don't get educated and men don't get skilled, they will struggle in the labor market. And across all of those domains, we've seen a downwards turn for men in the last four or five decades.

There's quite a fierce debate about the differences between male and female brains. And in adulthood, I think there's not much evidence that the brains are that different in ways that we should worry about, or that are particularly consequential. But where there's no real debate is in the timing of brain development. It is quite clear that girls brains develop more quickly than boys brains do, and that the biggest difference seems to occur in adolescence.

So if you look at the U.S., for example, in the average school district in the U.S., girls are almost a grade level ahead of boys in English, and have caught up in math. If we look at those with the highest GPA scores, the top 10%, two-thirds of those are girls. If we look at those at the bottom, two-thirds of those are boys.

The overall picture is, that on almost every measure, at almost every age, and in almost every advanced economy in the world, the girls are leaving the boys way behind, and the women leaving the men.

Defenders can design their own infrastructure to be im-mutable and ephemeral, as is becoming an emerging trend inprivate sector defense through the practice of Security ChaosEngineering

We propose a Sludge Strategy for cyber defense that pri-oritizes investments into techniques, tools, and technologiesthat add friction into attacker workflows and raise the costof conducting operations

Thaler and Sunstein use the phrase “choice architecture” todescribe the design in which choices are presented to people.These choices are made easier by nudges and more difficultby sludge. To understand choice architecture, it is necessary toexamine both nudge and sludge. Nudges gently steer people ina direction that increases welfare, including cybersecurity, andare commonly intended to make good outcomes easy. Tradi-tionally, nudges have been used to encourage well-intentionedusers to behave in a way that they are better off for doingso. These choices are not guaranteed, but research shows thatthey are selected more often.

Birhane andPrabhu note, echoing Ruha Benjamin [ 15 ], “Feeding AI systems onthe world’s beauty, ugliness, and cruelty, but expecting it to reflectonly the beauty is a fantasy.”

When such consumers therefore mistake the meaning attributed tothe MT output as the actual communicative intent of the originaltext’s author, real-world harm can ensue.

humancommunication relies on the interpretation of implicit meaningconveyed between individuals. The fact that human-human com-munication is a jointly constructed activity [29 , 128] is most clearlytrue in co-situated spoken or signed communication, but we usethe same facilities for producing language that is intended for au-diences not co-present with us (readers, listeners, watchers at adistance in time or space) and in interpreting such language whenwe encounter it. It must follow that even when we don’t know theperson who generated the language we are interpreting, we build apartial model of who they are and what common ground we thinkthey share with us, and use this in interpreting their words.

However, no actual language understanding is taking place inLM-driven approaches to these tasks, as can be shown by carefulmanipulation of the test data to remove spurious cues the systemsare leveraging [ 21 , 93 ]. Furthermore, as Bender and Koller [ 14 ]argue from a theoretical perspective, languages are systems ofsigns [ 37 ], i.e. pairings of form and meaning. But the training datafor LMs is only form; they do not have access to meaning. Therefore,claims about model abilities must be carefully characterized.

In this section,we discuss how large, uncurated, Internet-based datasets encodethe dominant/hegemonic view, which further harms people at themargins, and recommend significant resource allocation towardsdataset curation and documentation practices.

the world  of crypto offers an incentive for VC firms to   invest in a crypto company receive a percentage  of their tokens and then sell those tokens to

axi  embodies a new generation of games

Andries and Horowitz   otherwise known as a16z they're one of the largest  Venture Capital firms they have a crypto fund   with around 7.6 billion to be invested in crypto  and web 3 startups and have been investing in   crypto companies dating back to 2013

I mean people suggested that you could replace  legal contracts with small contracts which are   programs that are built on the blockchain and  that's usually accompanied with the phrase coder's   law this is a smart contract and this is a legal  contract these two things aren't the same right   you can't have law be enacted by computer code  because law inherently requires third parties   to assess evidence intentions and a bunch of  other variables that you just can't Outsource

now web 3.0 is coming

in some of the announcements from  celebrities about their nft purchases there   was this constant reference to a company called  moonpay thanking them for help with purchasing

people have accused that sale of essentially  being a giant marketing stunt to increase   the value of the B20 token

crypto kitties was probably one of the  first nft projects to make it into the spotlight

you could  just use ethereum's blockchain to create your own   cryptocurrencies or crypto assets as people called  them these assets that existed without their own   native blockchain were called tokens

now Ponzi schemes are  kept Alive by continuously finding new recruits   and new markets to tap into so that money is  continuously being poured into the scheme and so   you start to see this similar incentive develop  in the crypto space this desperate need to find   a use case for this stuff and that use case has  to be revolutionary enough to justify its Rising

despite its failings Bitcoin still  survived and is very much present to this day   but that's just the thing the Bitcoin that we see  today is a shell of its former identity where most   of the purchasing of Bitcoin today happens  on centralized exchanges that have to comply   with the laws of centralized institutions in the  instances where you've heard about Bitcoin or if   you've ever been encouraged to buy Bitcoin under  what context is that always framed

For instance, GPT-2’s training data is sourced by scraping out-bound links from Reddit, and Pew Internet Research’s 2016 surveyreveals 67% of Reddit users in the United States are men, and 64%between ages 18 and 29.13 Similarly, recent surveys of Wikipediansfind that only 8.8–15% are women or girls [9].Furthermore, while user-generated content sites like Reddit,Twitter, and Wikipedia present themselves as open and accessibleto anyone, there are structural factors including moderation prac-tices which make them less welcoming to marginalized populations.

the voices of people most likely to hew toa hegemonic viewpoint are also more likely to be retained. In thecase of US and UK English, this means that white supremacist andmisogynistic, ageist, etc. views are overrepresented in the trainingdata, not only exceeding their prevalence in the general populationbut also setting up models trained on these datasets to furtheramplify biases and harms.

While the average human is responsible for an estimated 5t 퐶푂2푒per year,2 the authors trained a Transformer (big) model [136] withneural architecture search and estimated that the training procedureemitted 284t of 퐶푂2. Training a single BERT base model (withouthyperparameter tuning) on GPUs was estimated to require as muchenergy as a trans-American flight.

we understand the term language model (LM) torefer to systems which are trained on string prediction tasks: that is,predicting the likelihood of a token (character, word or string) giveneither its preceding context or (in bidirectional and masked LMs)its surrounding context. Such systems are unsupervised and whendeployed, take a text as input, commonly outputting scores or stringpredictions.

OpenAI is perhaps one of the oddest companies to emerge from Silicon Valley. It was set up as a non-profit in 2015 to promote and develop "friendly" AI in a way that "benefits humanity as a whole". Elon Musk, Peter Thiel and other leading tech figures pledged US$1 billion towards its goals.Their thinking was we couldn't trust for-profit companies to develop increasingly capable AI that aligned with humanity's prosperity. AI therefore needed to be developed by a non-profit and, as the name suggested, in an open way.In 2019 OpenAI transitioned into a capped for-profit company (with investors limited to a maximum return of 100 times their investment) and took a US$1 billion investment from Microsoft so it could scale and compete with the tech giants.

ChatGPT is a bit like autocomplete on your phone. Your phone is trained on a dictionary of words so it completes words. ChatGPT is trained on pretty much all of the web, and can therefore complete whole sentences – or even whole paragraphs.

Information scientist Stefanie Haustein at the University of Ottawa in Canada, who has studied the impact of Twitter on scientific communication, says the changes show why it’s concerning that scientists embraced a private, for-profit firm’s platform to communicate on. “We’re in the hands of actors whose main interest is not the greater good for scholarly communication,” she says.

despite Twitter’s self-styled reputation as a public town square — where everyone gathers to see the same messages — in practice, the pandemic showed how users segregate to follow mostly those with similar views, argues information scientist Oliver Johnson at the University of Bristol, UK. For instance, those who believed that COVID-19 was a fiction would tend to follow others who agreed, he says, whereas others who argued that the way to deal with the pandemic was to lock down for a ‘zero COVID’ approach were in their own bubble.

Rodrigo Costas Comesana, an information scientist at Leiden University in the Netherlands, and his colleagues published a data set of half a million Twitter users1 who are probably researchers. (The team used software to try to match details of Twitter profiles to those of authors on scientific papers.) In a similar, smaller 2020 study, Costas and others estimated that at least 1% of paper authors in the Web of Science had profiles on Twitter, with the proportion varying by country2. A 2014 Nature survey found that 13% of researchers used Twitter regularly, although respondents were mostly English-speaking and there would have been self-selection bias (see Nature 512, 126–129; 2014).

Recipes are usually not protected by copyright due to the idea-expression dichotomy. The idea-expression dichotomy creates a dividing line between ideas, which are not protected by copyright law, and the expression of those ideas, which can be protected by copyright law.

Three weeks ago, an experimental chat bot called ChatGPT made its case to be the industry’s next big disrupter. It can serve up information in clear, simple sentences, rather than just a list of internet links. It can explain concepts in ways people can easily understand. It can even generate ideas from scratch, including business strategies, Christmas gift suggestions, blog topics and vacation plans.

Here’s an example of what homework might look like under this new paradigm. Imagine that a school acquires an AI software suite that students are expected to use for their answers about Hobbes or anything else; every answer that is generated is recorded so that teachers can instantly ascertain that students didn’t use a different system. Moreover, instead of futilely demanding that students write essays themselves, teachers insist on AI. Here’s the thing, though: the system will frequently give the wrong answers (and not just on accident — wrong answers will be often pushed out on purpose); the real skill in the homework assignment will be in verifying the answers the system churns out — learning how to be a verifier and an editor, instead of a regurgitator. What is compelling about this new skillset is that it isn’t simply a capability that will be increasingly important in an AI-dominated world: it’s a skillset that is incredibly valuable today. After all, it is not as if the Internet is, as long as the content is generated by humans and not AI, “right”; indeed, one analogy for ChatGPT’s output is that sort of poster we are all familiar with who asserts things authoritatively regardless of whether or not they are true. Verifying and editing is an essential skillset right now for every individual.

That there, though, also shows why AI-generated text is something completely different; calculators are deterministic devices: if you calculate 4,839 + 3,948 - 45 you get 8,742, every time. That’s also why it is a sufficient remedy for teachers to requires students show their work: there is one path to the right answer and demonstrating the ability to walk down that path is more important than getting the final result. AI output, on the other hand, is probabilistic: ChatGPT doesn’t have any internal record of right and wrong, but rather a statistical model about what bits of language go together under different contexts. The base of that context is the overall corpus of data that GPT-3 is trained on, along with additional context from ChatGPT’s RLHF training, as well as the prompt and previous conversations, and, soon enough, feedback from this week’s release.

The criticisms of ChatGPT pushed Andreessen beyond his longtime position that Silicon Valley ought only to be celebrated, not scrutinized. The simple presence of ethical thinking about AI, he said, ought to be regarded as a form of censorship. “‘AI regulation’ = ‘AI ethics’ = ‘AI safety’ = ‘AI censorship,’” he wrote in a December 3 tweet. “AI is a tool for use by people,” he added two minutes later. “Censoring AI = censoring people.” It’s a radically pro-business stance even by the free market tastes of venture capital, one that suggests food inspectors keeping tainted meat out of your fridge amounts to censorship as well.

It’s tempting to believe incredible human-seeming software is in a way superhuman, Block-Wehba warned, and incapable of human error. “Something scholars of law and technology talk about a lot is the ‘veneer of objectivity’ — a decision that might be scrutinized sharply if made by a human gains a sense of legitimacy once it is automated,” she said.

The numbers have gone up a bit since then, but black Americans still own less than 2% of commercial radio stations in the country and it wreaked havoc on local ownershi

Shock jocks were rarely political, especially in the early days were mostly just kind of like lewd or gross, shocking, you know, as is in the name, But as that sort of brash new style got popular, it became clear that political talk could bring that shock Jock energy to program. This is Alan Berg. He was a liberal talk radio host out of Denver. He got started in the late 1970s and was really taking off in the The 80s. He was Jewish and was known for being pretty vitriolic and calling out racism and bigotry are still firmly in control of the Soviet Union, responsible for the murder of 50 million Christians. Think your ability to reason and your program and you are a Nazi by your very own, given what we know about AM and FM talk radio. Now, this is very surprising to hear. I mean, it's got the in your face confrontational talk show vibe, but it's from the opposite side of the political spectrum, totally. It is surprising and to paint a picture of how he was received. At one point, there's this pole that goes out in Denver that asks residents to name the city's most beloved media personality and its most despised. And Alan Berg won both awards. That's a feat that's kind of incredible. And Alan Berg was super well known.

the FCC starts giving broadcasters recommendations of how they can avoid that same fate, how they can satisfy that longstanding vague requirement to serve the public interest. And they really start pushing this thing called Ascertainment Ascertainment Swor when people in local communities were interviewed by station officials, people who we're never asked before, what do you think ought to be on radio, what do you think ought to be on tv. Now they were being asked these questions, this was done by radio stations and television stations, commercial stations, public stations across the country, You know, this seems so simple and so revolutionary at the same time, like just ask people what they want to hear about and maybe that would shape the broadcasting accordingly.

So it's the fifties and sixties, the stations, they're cutting the NBC coverage of the civil rights movement and it's not just, you know, morally dubious, it's actually against the policies of the FCC. Exactly, right. So civil rights activists decided to put that to the test and they ended up challenging Wlbt? S license for repeatedly denying them airtime. At first, the FCC dismissed the case, but then the activists sued the FCC and they won. And eventually, years later, a federal court decided that Wlbt could stay on the air, but their license would be transferred to a nonprofit, multiracial group of broadcasters.

Okay, so flashback to the 1920s and the emergence of something called the public interest mandate, basically when radio was new, a ton of people wanted to broadcast the demand for space on the dial outstripped supply. So to narrow the field, the federal government says that any station using the public airwaves needs to serve the public interest. So what do they mean by the public interest? Yeah, right? It's like super vague, right? But the FCC clarified what it meant by public interest in the years following World War Two, They had seen how radio could be used to promote fascism in Europe, and they didn't want us radio stations to become propaganda outlets. And so in 1949, the FCC basically says to stations in order to serve the public, you need to give airtime to coverage of current events and you have to include multiple perspectives in your coverage. This is the basis of what comes to be known as the fairness doctrine.

The presence of Twitter’s code — known as the Twitter advertising pixel — has grown more troublesome since Elon Musk purchased the platform.AdvertisementThat’s because under the terms of Musk’s purchase, large foreign investors were granted special privileges. Anyone who invested $250 million or more is entitled to receive information beyond what lower-level investors can receive. Among the higher-end investors include a Saudi prince’s holding company and a Qatari fund.

Instead, we should adopt a vision for the best possible America for this century, one that acknowledges that people, money, goods, and expressions are going to flow across borders and oceans, but that embraces justice and human flourishing as the ends of that process instead of morally vacant values like efficiency or productivity.

We often misdiagnose our current malady as one of “polarization.” That’s wrong. We have one rogue, ethno-authoritarian party and one fairly stable and diverse party. It just looks like polarization when you map it red and blue or consider these parties to be equal in levels of mercenary commitment, which they overwhelmingly are not. In one sense, America has always been polarized, just not along partisan lines. It’s also been more polarized rather recently, as in 1919 or 1968.Instead, we suffer from judicial tyranny fueled by white supremacy. One largely unaccountable branch of government has been captured by ideologues who have committed themselves to undermining the will of the electorate on matters ranging from women’s bodily autonomy to voting rights to the ability of the executive branch to carry out the policy directives of Congress by regulating commerce and industry.

While the datagram has served veIy well in solving themost important goals of the Internet, it has not served sowell when we attempt to addresssome of the goals whichwere further down the priority list. For example, thegoals of resource management and accountability haveproved difficult to achieve in the context of datagrams.As the previous section discussed, most datagrams are apart of some sequence of packets from source todestination, rather than isolated units at the applicationlevel. However, the gateway cannot directly see theexistence of this sequence, because it is forced to dealwith each packet in isolation. Therefore, resourcemanagement decisions or accounting must be done oneach packet separately. Imposing the datagram model onthe intemet layer has deprived that layer of an importantsource of information which it could use in achievingthese goals.

There is a mistaken assumption often associated withdatagrams, which is that the motivation for datagrams isthe support of a higher level service which is essentiallyequivalent to the datagram. In other words, it hassometimes been suggested that the datagram is providedbecause the transport service which the applicationrequires is a datagram service. In fact, this is seldom thecase. While some applications in the Internet, such assimple queries of date servers or name servers, use anaccess method based on an unreliable datagram, mostservices within the Internet would like a moresophisticated transport model than simple datagram.Some services would like the reliability enhanced, somewould like the delay smoothed and buffered, but almostall have some expectation more complex than adatagram. It is important to understand that the role ofthe datagram in this respect is as a building block, and notas a service in itself.

This problem was particularly aggravating because thegoal of the Internet project was to produce specificationdocuments which were to become military standards. Itis a well known problem with government contractingthat one cannot expect a contractor to meet any criteriawhich is not a part of the procurement standard. If theInternet is concerned about performance, therefore, it wasmandatory that performance requirements be put into theprocurement specification. It was trivial to inventspecifications which constrained the performance, forexample to specify that the implementation must becapable of passing 1.000 packets a second. However, thissort of constraint could not be part of the architecture,and it was therefore up to the individual performing theprocurement to recognize that these performanceconstraints must be added to the specification, and tospecify them properly to achieve a realization whichprovides the required types of service

Put another way, the architecture tried very hard not toconstrain the range of service which the Internet could beengineered to provide. This, in turn, means that tounderstand the service which can be offered by aparticular implementation of an Internet, one must looknot to the architecture, but to the actual engineering of thesoftware within the particular hosts and gateways, and tothe particular networks which have been incorporated.

Another possible source of inefficiency is retransmissionof lost packets. Since Internet does not insist that lostpackets be recovered at the network level, it may benecessary to retransmit a lost packet from one end of theInternet to the other. This means that the retransmittedpacket may cross several intervening nets a second time,whereas recovery at the network level would not generatethis repeat traffic. This is an example of the tradeoffresulting from the decision, discussed above, of providingservices from the end-points. The network interface codeis much simpler, but the overall efficiency is potentiallyless. However, if the retransmission rate is low enough(for example, 1%) then the incremental cost is tolerable.As a rough rule of thumb for networks incorporated intothe architecture, a loss of one packet in a hundred is quitereasonable, but a loss of one packet in ten suggests thatreliability enhancements be added to the network if thattype of service is required.

On the other hand, some of the most significant problemswith the Internet today relate to lack of sufficient tools fordistributed management,especially in the area of routing.In the large intemet being currently operated, routingdecisions need to be constrained by policies for resourceusage. Today this can be done only in a very limitedway, which requires manual setting of tables. This iserror-prone and at the same time not sufficientlypowerful. The most important change in the Internetarchitecture over the next few years will probably be thedevelopment of a new generation of tools formanagement of resources in the context of multipleadministrations.

This goal caused TCP and IP, which originally had beena single protocol in the architecture, to be separated intotwo layers. TCP provided one particular type of service,the reliable sequenceddata stream, while IP attempted toprovide a basic building block out of which a variety oftypes of service could be built. This building block wasthe datagram, which had also been adopted to supportsurvivability. Since the reliability associated with thedelivery of a datagram was not guaranteed, but “besteffort,” it was possible to build out of the datagram aservice that was reliable (by acknowledging andretransmitting at a higher level), or a service which tradedreliability for the primitive delay characteristics of theunderlying network substrate. The User DatagramProtocol (UDP)13 was created to provide a application-level interface to the basic datagram service of Internet.

It was very important for the success of the Internetarchitecture that it be able to incorporate and utilize awide variety of network technologies, including militaryand commercial facilities. The Internet architecture hasbeen very successful in meeting this goal: it is operatedover a wide variety of networks, including long haul nets(the ARPANET itself and various X.25 networks), localarea nets (Ethernet, ringnet, etc.), broadcast satellite nets(the DARPA Atlantic Satellite Network’“, I5 operating at64 kilobits per second and the DARPA ExperimentalWideband Satellite Net,16 operating within the UnitedStates at 3 megabits per second), packet radio networks(the DARPA packet radio network, as well as anexperimental British packet radio net and a networkdeveloped by amateur radio operators), a variety of seriallinks, ranging from 1200 bit per second asynchronousconnections to TI links, and a variety of other ad hocfacilities, including intercomputer busses and thetransport service provided by the higher layers of othernetwork suites, such as IBM’s HASP.

Another service which did not fu TCP was real timedelivery of digitized speech, which was needed to supportthe teleconferencing aspect of command and controlapplications. III real time digital speech, the primaryrequirement is not a reliable service, but a service whichminimizes and smooths the delay in the delivery ofpackets.

There are two consequencesto the fate-sharing approachto survivability. First. the intermediate packet switchingnodes, or gateways, must not have any essential stateinformation about on-going connections. Instead, theyare stateless packet switches, a class of network designsometimes called a “datagram” network. Secondly, rathermore trust is placed in the host machine than in anarchitecture where the network ensures the reliabledelivery of data. If the host resident algorithms thatensure the sequencing and acknowledgment of data fail,applications on that machine are prevented fromoperation.

It was an assumption in thisarchitecture that synchronization would never be lostunless there was no physical path over which any sort ofcommunication could be achieved. In other words, at thetop of transport, there is only one failure, and it is totalpartition. The architecture was to mask completely anytransient failure.

For example,since this network was designed to operate in a militarycontext, which implied the possibility of a hostileenvironment, survivability was put as a first goal, andaccountability as a last goal. During wartime. one is lessconcerned with detailed accounting of resources usedthan with mustering whatever resources are available andrapidly deploying them it-i an operational manner. Whilethe architects of the Internet were mindful ofaccountability, the problem received very little attentionduring the early stages of the design. aud is only nowbeing considered. An architecture primarily forcommercial deployment would clearly place these goalsat the opposite end of the list.

From these assumptions comes the fundamental structureof the Internet: a packet switched communicationsfacility in which a number of distinguishable networksam connected together using packet communicationsprocessors called gateways which implement a store aridforward packet forwarding algorithm.

The technique selected for multiplexing was packetswitching. Au alternative such as circuit switching couldhave been considered, but the applications beingsupported, such as remote login, were naturally served bythe packet switching paradigm, and the networks whichwere to be integrated together in this project were packetswitching networks. So packet switching was acceptedas a fundamental component of the Internet architecture.

Further, networks representadministrative boundaries of control, and it was anambition of this project to come to grips with the problemof integrating a number of separately administratedentities into a common utility.

The components of the Internet were networks, whichwere to be interconnected to provide some larger service.The original goal was to connect together the ori BinalARPANET’ with the ARPA packet radio network’. ‘, inorder to give users on the packet radio network accesstothe large service machines on the ARPANET.

The connectionless configuration of IS0protocols has also been colored by the history of theInternet suite, so an understanding ‘of the Internet designphilosophy may be helpful to those working with ISO.

Just for reference I believe that the "more speech" idea originated with Louis Brandeis, who was a brilliant thinker and one of the important liberal Supreme Court justices of the 20th century. The actual quote is:"If there be time to expose through discussion the falsehood and fallacies, to avert the evil by the process of education, the remedy to be applied is more speech, not enforced silence."[0]Louis Brandeis did believe that context and specifics are important, so I think the technology of the online platform is significant especially with respect to the first part of that quote.[0] https://tile.loc.gov/storage-services/service/ll/usrep/usrep...

The hypothesis is that hate speech is met with other speech in a free marketplace of ideas.That hypothesis only functions if users are trapped in one conversational space. What happens instead is that users choose not to volunteer their time and labor to speak around or over those calling for their non-existence (or for the non-existence of their friends and loved ones) and go elsewhere... Taking their money and attention with them.As those promulgating the hate speech tend to be a much smaller group than those who leave, it is in the selfish interest of most forums to police that kind of signal jamming to maximize their possible user-base. Otherwise, you end up with a forum full mostly of those dabbling in hate speech, which is (a) not particularly advertiser friendly, (b) hostile to further growth, and (c) not something most people who get into this gig find themselves proud of.

The lawsuit, filed on Dec. 1 in federal court

The ability for users to choose if they wish to be collateral damage is what makes Mastodon work. If an instance is de-federated due to extremism, the users can pressure their moderators to act in order to gain re-federation. Otherwise, they must make the decision if to go down with the ship or simply move. This creates a healthy self-regulating ecosystem where once an instance starts to get de-federated, reasonable users will move their accounts, leaving behind unreasonable ones, which further justifies de-federation, and will lead to more and more instances choosing to de-federate the offending one.

Most Mastodon servers run on donations, which creates a very different dynamic. It is very easy for a toxic platform to generate revenue through ad impressions, but most people are not willing to pay hard-earned money to get yelled at by extremists all day. This is why Twitter’s subscription model will never work. With Mastodon, people find a community they enjoy, and thus are happy to donate to maintain. Which add a new dynamic. Since Mastodon is basically a network of communities, it is expected that moderators are responsible for their own community, lowering the burden for everyone. Let’s say you run a Mastodon instance and a user of another instance has become problematic towards your users. You report them to their instance’s moderators, but the moderators decline to act. What can you do? Well a lot, actually.

What I missed about Mastodon was its very different culture. Ad-driven social media platforms are willing to tolerate monumental volumes of abusive users. They’ve discovered the same thing the Mainstream Media did: negative emotions grip people’s attention harder than positive ones. Hate and fear drives engagement, and engagement drives ad impressions. Mastodon is not an ad-driven platform. There is absolutely zero incentives to let awful people run amok in the name of engagement. The goal of Mastodon is to build a friendly collection of communities, not an attention leeching hate mill. As a result, most Mastodon instance operators have come to a consensus that hate speech shouldn’t be allowed. Already, that sets it far apart from twitter, but wait, there’s more. When it comes to other topics, what is and isn’t allowed is on an instance-by-instance basis, so you can choose your own adventure.

As users begin migrating to the noncommercial fediverse, they need to reconsider their expectations for social media — and bring them in line with what we expect from other arenas of social life. We need to learn how to become more like engaged democratic citizens in the life of our networks.

Because Mastodon is designed more for chatter than governance, we use a separate platform, Loomio, for our deliberation and decision-making.

We believe that it is time to embrace the old idea of subsidiarity, which dates back to early Calvinist theology and Catholic social teaching. The European Union’s founding documents use the term, too. It means that in a large and interconnected system, people in a local community should have the power to address their own problems. Some decisions are made at higher levels, but only when necessary. Subsidiarity is about achieving the right balance between local units and the larger systems.

Nevertheless, from the standpoint of learning theory, these and other authors have it backward, because a steep learning curve, i.e., a curve with a large positive slope, is associated with a skill that is acquired easily and rapidly (Hopper et al., 2007).

Nevertheless, even ardent proponents of the view that DID is a naturally occurring condition that stems largely from childhood trauma (e.g., Ross, 1994) acknowledge that “multiple personality disorder” is a misnomer (Lilienfeld and Lynn, 2015), because individuals with DID do not genuinely harbor two or more fully developed personalities

There is no known “optimal” level of neurotransmitters in the brain, so it is unclear what would constitute an “imbalance.” Nor is there evidence for an optimal ratio among different neurotransmitter levels. Moreover, although serotonin reuptake inhibitors, such as fluoxetine (Prozac) and sertraline (Zoloft), appear to alleviate the symptoms of severe depression, there is evidence that at least one serotonin reuptake enhancer, namely tianepine (Stablon), is also efficacious for depression (Akiki, 2014). The fact that two efficacious classes of medications exert opposing effects on serotonin levels raises questions concerning a simplistic chemical imbalance model.

Furthermore, there are ample reasons to doubt whether “brainwashing” permanently alters beliefs (Melton, 1999). For example, during the Korean War, only a small minority of the 3500 American political prisoners subjected to intense indoctrination techniques by Chinese captors generated false confessions. Moreover, an even smaller number (probably under 1%) displayed any signs of adherence to Communist ideologies following their return to the US, and even these were individuals who returned to Communist subcultures

numerous scholars have warned of the jingle and jangle fallacies, the former being the error of referring to different constructs by the same name and the latter the error of referring to the same construct by different names (Kelley, 1927; Block, 1995; Markon, 2009). As an example of the jingle fallacy, many authors use the term “anxiety” to refer interchangeably to trait anxiety and trait fear. Nevertheless, research consistently shows that fear and anxiety are etiologically separable dispositions and that measures of these constructs are only modestly correlated (Sylvers et al., 2011). As an example of the jangle fallacy, dozens of studies in the 1960s focused on the correlates of the ostensibly distinct personality dimension of repression-sensitization (e.g., Byrne, 1964). Nevertheless, research eventually demonstrated that this dimension was essentially identical to trait anxiety (Watson and Clark, 1984). In the field of social psychology, Hagger (2014) similarly referred to the “deja variable” problem, the ahistorical tendency of researchers to concoct new labels for phenomena that have long been described using other terminology (e.g., the use of 15 different terms to describe the false consensus effect; see Miller and Pedersen, 1999).

The Great Depression and its aftermath offered Schmitz and a colleague one such opportunity. Poverty shrinks brains from birth By comparing markers of ageing in around 800 people who were born throughout the 1930s, the team observed that those born in US states hit hardest by the recession — where unemployment and wage reductions were highest — have a pattern of markers that make their cells look older than they should. The impact was diminished in people who were born in states that fared better during the 1930s.The cells could have altered the epigenetic tags during early childhood or later in life. But the results suggest that some sort of biological foundation was laid before birth for children of the Great Depression that affected how they would age, epigenetically, later in life.

A 2020 study by the European Union found that contrails and other non-CO2 aircraft emissions warm the planet twice as much as the carbon dioxide released by airplanes.

Meta collects so much data even the company itself sometimes may be unaware of where it ends up. Earlier this year Vice reported on a leaked Facebook document written by Facebook privacy engineers who said the company did not “have an adequate level of control and explainability over how our systems use data,” making it difficult to promise it wouldn’t use certain data for certain purposes.

Some of the sensitive data collection analyzed by The Markup appears linked to default behaviors of the Meta Pixel, while some appears to arise from customizations made by the tax filing services, someone acting on their behalf, or other software installed on the site. Report Deeply and Fix Things Because it turns out moving fast and breaking things broke some super important things. Give Now For example, Meta Pixel collected health savings account and college expense information from H&R Block’s site because the information appeared in webpage titles and the standard configuration of the Meta Pixel automatically collects the title of a page the user is viewing, along with the web address of the page and other data. It was able to collect income information from Ramsey Solutions because the information appeared in a summary that expanded when clicked. The summary was detected by the pixel as a button, and in its default configuration the pixel collects text from inside a clicked button.  The pixels embedded by TaxSlayer and TaxAct used a feature called “automatic advanced matching.” That feature scans forms looking for fields it thinks contain personally identifiable information like a phone number, first name, last name, or email address, then sends detected information to Meta. On TaxSlayer’s site this feature collected phone numbers and the names of filers and their dependents. On TaxAct it collected the names of dependents.

We’re not mandating content warnings.   I think I’ve kind of had every single opinion that one can have about this. My first response, which I think is most journalists’ first response, was, “Who are these precious snowflakes?” Then a bunch of people said, “No, that’s not how to think about it; it’s really just the subject line of an email,” and if I had the right to send you an email where you had to see the whole thing, that’d be kind of annoying. But then a lot of people in the BIPOC community said, “The way this is being used on Mastodon is often to shield White people from racism and homophobia and other issues.” And so I’m very sympathetic to that as well. I think the solution Eugen came up with is the right solution: It’s a tool, and you can use it if you want to.

Everyone who goes through the exercise of “what is journalism?” quickly learns there are no obvious, uncontroversial answers. We had a conversation this morning about somebody who has a blog about beer. We said, well, this person does reporting, they actually interview people, they look at statistics, they’re not just sharing their opinion on beer. And it felt like, yeah, that’s journalism. Now, would we make that decision a month from now? I don’t know. I don’t think it’s appropriate for me to get into specifics, but we’ve had some tricky edge cases. Inherently, it’s tricky.

The Twitter blue check, for all the hate I have given Twitter over the years, is a public good. It is good, in my view, that when you read a news article or view a post, you can know with confidence it’s the journalist at that institution. It doesn’t mean they’re 100 percent right or 100 percent ethical, but it does mean that’s a person who is in some way constrained by journalism ethics.

Davidson: I think the interface on Mastodon makes me behave differently. If I have a funny joke or a really powerful statement and I want lots of people to hear it, then Twitter’s way better for that right now. However, if something really provokes a big conversation, it’s actually fairly challenging to keep up with the conversation on Twitter. I find that when something gets hundreds of thousands of replies, it’s functionally impossible to even read all of them, let alone respond to all of them. My Twitter personality, like a lot of people’s, is more shouting. Whereas on Mastodon, it’s actually much harder to go viral. There’s no algorithm promoting tweets. It’s just the people you follow. This is the order in which they come. It’s not really set up for that kind of, “Oh my god, everybody’s talking about this one post.” It is set up to foster conversation. I have something like 150,000 followers on Twitter, and I have something like 2,500 on Mastodon, but I have way more substantive conversations on Mastodon even though it’s a smaller audience. I think there’s both design choices that lead to this and also just the vibe of the place where even pointed disagreements are somehow more thoughtful and more respectful on Mastodon.

I just learned this idea of anchor institution at the Association of Rural and Small Libraries Conference. There are institutions that anchor communities. Right. So that the hospital is one. Lots of people work there. Everyone goes there at some point, has a role to play in the community and the library is similar. You'll often get people who will say that the library's are irrelevant, but that just means that they can afford not to use a public service. And I don't know why they are the people we ask to share their expertise on the use of public services. But most of us use the public library. Our kids get their picture books there. We maybe do passport services. Maybe the library has tech training. One of my first jobs at the public library was teaching senior citizens how to do mouse and keyboarding skills. So where else are you going to learn those things? You learn them at the library.

BROOKE GLADSTONE It's always framed as parents rights, but according to Summer Lopez, who's the chief program officer of free expression at PEN America, most of these book bans are on books that families and children can elect to read. They're not required to read them. They just exist.   EMILY DRABINSKI One of the things I loved about libraries when I first started is that they are non-coercive learning spaces. You don't have to read anything. You can choose from anything on the shelf. And if your kid checks out something you don't want them to read, that's between you and your child and the way that you're parenting. And it just isn't something that the state needs to be involved in.

Well, librarians are professionals. We go through a library master's degree program, and we're trained on the job to make book selections for our communities. We build collections that are responsive to the needs of the people we serve. So right now, I'm talking to you from the Graduate Center in midtown Manhattan. My liaison responsibilities here to the School of Labor and Urban Studies and to our urban education program. I'm not going to choose Gender Queer to purchase for our library, not because I'm a censor, but because that's not a book that we need in our collection right now. But I think you can tell that it's not really about the books if you look to some of the particular cases. So, for example, attacks on the Boundary County Library in Northern Idaho. This was the same set of 300 books that they want banned. The extremist right in that part of the state came after the public library there. That library didn't own any of the books that were on the list.

BROOKE GLADSTONE In the Tennessee State Assembly last April, Representative Jerry Sexton took on this question.   [CLIP]   JERRY SEXTON Let's say you take these books out of the library. What are you going to do with them? You can put them on the street, let them on fire.    JERRY SEXTON I don't have a clue, but I would burn them.

“In a way, Twitter has become a kind of aggregator of information,” says Eliot Higgins, founder of open-source investigators Bellingcat, who helped bring the perpetrators who downed MH17 to justice. “A lot of this stuff you see from Ukraine, the footage comes from Telegram channels that other people are following, but they're sharing it on Twitter.” Twitter has made it easier to categorize and consume content from almost any niche in the world, tapping into a real-time news feed of relevant information from both massive organizations and small, independent voices. Its absence would be keenly felt.

For eight years, the US Library of Congress took it upon itself to maintain a public record of all tweets, but it stopped in 2018, instead selecting only a small number of accounts’ posts to capture.  “It never, ever worked,” says William Kilbride, executive director of the Digital Preservation Coalition. The data the library was expected to store was too vast, the volume coming out of the firehose too great. “Let me put that in context: it’s the Library of Congress. They had some of the best expertise on this topic. If the Library of Congress can’t do it, that tells you something quite important,” he says.

Part of what makes Twitter’s potential collapse uniquely challenging is that the “digital public square” has been built on the servers of a private company, says  O’Connor’s colleague Elise Thomas, senior OSINT analyst with the ISD. It’s a problem we’ll have to deal with many times over the coming decades, she says: “This is perhaps the first really big test of that.”

Judith Cremer, the library director, said the book was added to the library after it made the William Allen White Award 2017-2018 Master List for grades 3-5, and has only been checked out four times.Cremer said parents have the option of filtering which books their children check out, and can speak to staff about limiting their children’s access to certain books. She stressed that she and her staff aren’t trying to fight the council and aren’t interested in divisive matters. She’s been at the library for almost 20 years, and just wants to serve the community.“We just are doing what public libraries do,” Cremer said. “We don’t really judge information, we are a reflection of the world and things that are in the world. We have information that has been published and mediated and checked for facts. So it’s a safe place that people can go to get access to that information. It’s not like we are handing out or advocating it in any way. It’s just there.”

St. Marys resident Hannah Stockman, a stay-at-home mom looking after 13 kids, said the move would be devastating for her and others like her.“At this point, it’s the only space left that we have for the public,” Stockman said. “We don’t have any pool or any other amenities through the community center. So people come here for many, many different reasons.”

Although complicated, Gen Z’s relationship with data privacy should be a consideration for brands when strategizing their data privacy policies and messaging for the future. Expectations around data privacy are shifting from something that sets companies apart in consumers’ minds to something that people expect the same way one might expect a service or product to work as advertised. For Gen Zers, this takes the form of skepticism that companies will keep their data safe, and their reluctance to give companies credit for getting it right means that good data privacy practices will increasingly be more about maintaining trust than building it.

The notable exception: social media companies. Gen Zers are more likely to trust social media companies to handle their data properly than older consumers, including millennials, are.

Furthermore, the youngest generation is more jaded than others on this topic, finding it less surprising if a company stores data in a way that exposes it to a breach or asks for information without explaining what it will be used for.

Gen Z came of age during a major moment in data privacy. The global conversation around the topic shifted following the Facebook/Cambridge Analytica scandal in 2018. The incident altered the public’s view of major technology companies from great innovators and drivers of the economy to entities that need more oversight. Massive regulatory efforts like the General Data Protection Regulation in Europe and the California Consumer Privacy Act have since gone into effect, with more on the way, representing a break in consumers’ trust in tech companies to sufficiently safeguard people’s data.

In other words, the community of early users were super serious about consent. They don’t like their utterances circulating in ways they don’t like. You could say, “well, tough; you’re posting stuff in public, right?” But since this is Mastodon, users have powerful tools for responding to actions they don’t like. If the folks on server A don’t like the behavior of people on server B, they can “defederate” from server B; everyone on server B can no longer see what folks on A are doing, and vice versa. (“Defederating” is another deep part of Mastodon’s design that is, ultimately, powerfully antiviral.)

Another big, big difference with Mastodon is that it has no algorithmic ranking of posts by popularity, virality, or content. Twitter’s algorithm creates a rich-get-richer effect: Once a tweet goes slightly viral, the algorithm picks up on that, pushes it more prominently into users’ feeds, and bingo: It’s a rogue wave.On Mastodon, in contrast, posts arrive in reverse chronological order. That’s it. If you’re not looking at your feed when a post slides by? You’ll miss it.

For example, Mastodon has no analogue of Twitter’s “quote-tweet” option. On Mastodon, you can retweet a post (they call it “boosting”). But you can’t append your own comment while boosting. You can’t quote-tweet.Whyever not? Because Mastodon’s original designer (and the community of early users) worried that quote-tweeting on Twitter had too often encouraged a lot of “would you look at this bullshit?” posts. And that early Mastodon community didn’t much like those dynamics.

As Beschizza said …“I wanted something where people could publish their thoughts without any false game of social manipulation, one-upmanship, and favor-trading.”It was, as I called it, “antiviral design”.

By the mid-2010s, Chinese people in big cities had generally switched from using cash to using Alipay and WeChat Pay. By the end of 2021, about 64 percent of Chinese people were using mobile payment systems, according to a report by Daxue Consulting, with Alipay and WeChat Pay handling most payments. For city dwellers, the figure was 80 percent. One reason China’s government is pushing the digital yuan is to try to gain more control of how citizens make payments. For years, big tech companies were able to operate almost like public utilities, creating and effectively regulating large parts of the financial industry.

The central bank is building the infrastructure needed to enable sweeping adoption in years to come, signing up merchants, adapting the banking system, and developing applications such as a way to earmark money for health care or transit, he says. That lays the groundwork for eCNY to be China’s default payment system in 10 to 15 years, and it has been enough to put the project ahead of any other government-backed digital currency.

Unlike a cryptocurrency like Bitcoin, the digital yuan is issued directly by China’s central bank and does not depend on a blockchain. The currency has the same value as its analog equivalent, the yuan or RMB, and for consumers the experience of using the digital yuan is not that different from any other mobile payment system or credit card. But on the back end, payments are not routed through a bank and can sometimes move without transaction fees, jumping from one e-wallet to another as easily as cash changes hands.

The hope for government-sanctioned digital currencies is that they will improve efficiency and spur innovation in financial services. But tech and China experts watching the country’s project say that eCNY, also known as the electronic Chinese yuan or digital yuan, also opens up new forms of government surveillance and social control. The head of UK intelligence agency GCHQ, Jeremy Fleming, warned in a speech last month that Beijing could use its digital currency to monitor its citizens and eventually evade international sanctions.

This circular process of issuing new shares to employees and then buying those shares back with company money – MY money as a shareholder – is called ‘sterilization’.

“There is growing evidence that the legislative and executive branch officials are using social media companies to engage in censorship by surrogate,” said Jonathan Turley, a professor of law at George Washington University, who has written about the lawsuit. “It is axiomatic that the government cannot do indirectly what it is prohibited from doing directly. If government officials are directing or facilitating such censorship, it raises serious First Amendment questions.”

Under President Joe Biden, the shifting focus on disinformation has continued. In January 2021, CISA replaced the Countering Foreign Influence Task force with the “Misinformation, Disinformation and Malinformation” team, which was created “to promote more flexibility to focus on general MDM.” By now, the scope of the effort had expanded beyond disinformation produced by foreign governments to include domestic versions. The MDM team, according to one CISA official quoted in the IG report, “counters all types of disinformation, to be responsive to current events.” Jen Easterly, Biden’s appointed director of CISA, swiftly made it clear that she would continue to shift resources in the agency to combat the spread of dangerous forms of information on social media.

The stepped up counter-disinformation effort began in 2018 following high-profile hacking incidents of U.S. firms, when Congress passed and President Donald Trump signed the Cybersecurity and Infrastructure Security Agency Act, forming a new wing of DHS devoted to protecting critical national infrastructure. An August 2022 report by the DHS Office of Inspector General sketches the rapidly accelerating move toward policing disinformation. From the outset, CISA boasted of an “evolved mission” to monitor social media discussions while “routing disinformation concerns” to private sector platforms.

DHS’s mission to fight disinformation, stemming from concerns around Russian influence in the 2016 presidential election, began taking shape during the 2020 election and over efforts to shape discussions around vaccine policy during the coronavirus pandemic. Documents collected by The Intercept from a variety of sources, including current officials and publicly available reports, reveal the evolution of more active measures by DHS. According to a draft copy of DHS’s Quadrennial Homeland Security Review, DHS’s capstone report outlining the department’s strategy and priorities in the coming years, the department plans to target “inaccurate information” on a wide range of topics, including “the origins of the COVID-19 pandemic and the efficacy of COVID-19 vaccines, racial justice, U.S. withdrawal from Afghanistan, and the nature of U.S. support to Ukraine.”

the container ship was simply becoming so large so unwieldy that much of the infrastructure around them is struggling to cope a lot of the decisions to build Supply chains were really based on

the industry agreed that the standard container sizes would be 20

at the same time the US Army had been experimenting and seeing success with their smaller container Express or context boxes during the Korean war

he understood that rather than adapting the container to suit the industry it was the industry and its entirety that would have to adapt trucks trains and ships ports and dockyards would all have to

he'd over time built a very large trucking company in the United States he became worried in the

it took about 11 and a half days to actually go across the Atlantic and it took about six or four days to actually unload it all in Germany

break both shipping tended to be slow a vessel could spend a week or more at the dock

Mark Levinson who has literally written the book on the shipping container called The Box how the shipping container made the world smaller and the

Mastodon gained 22,139 new accounts this past week and 10,801 in the day after Musk took over, said Mastodon chief executive Eugen Rochko. The site now has more than 380,000 monthly active users, while Twitter has 237.8 million daily active users.

Claudia requested support through the Teleperformance scheme, which had to be approved by a supervisor, but she did not receive any help for two months. When the company’s mental health support staff finally did get in touch, they said they were unable to help her and told her to seek out support through the Colombian healthcare system.

Some social media platforms struggle with even relatively simple tasks, such as detecting copies of terrorist videos that have already been removed. But their task becomes even harder when they are asked to quickly remove content that nobody has ever seen before. “The human brain is the most effective tool to identify toxic material,” said Roi Carthy, the chief marketing officer of L1ght, a content moderation AI company. Humans become especially useful when harmful content is delivered in new formats and contexts that AI may not identify. “There’s nobody that knows how to solve content moderation holistically, period,” Carthy said. “There’s no such thing.”

Advocate Aurora Health says it embedded pixel tracking technologies into its patient portals and some of its scheduling widgets in a bid to "better understand patient needs and preferences."

A Midwestern hospital system is treating its use of Google and Facebook web tracking technologies as a data breach, notifying 3 million individuals that the computing giants may have obtained patient information.

It is the work itself that is copyrighted, not the form.56 While works mustbe in a fixed form to qualify for copyright protection, that protection is for the workitself. Some forms are necessarily part of some types of works (e.g., sculpture), butthis cannot be said of most printed works.57 The form in which a work is fixed isirrelevant, and Congress recognized the importance of media neutrality when itadopted the language in the Copyright Act.58 Digitization changes only the form,and “the ‘transfer of a work between media’ does not ‘alte[r] the character of ’ thatwork for copyright purposes.”

First, digitization and distributionwould not be done for commercial gain and would be handled in a manner com-pletely consistent with a library’s function. Because the library would not beincreasing the number of copies available for use at any given time, the digital copywould not serve as a substitute for an additional subscription or purchase. Shoulddemand be so great that multiple copies were needed simultaneously, TALLOwould need to purchase or license additional copies or individual libraries withinthe consortium would need to make local purchases.

Instead of the current practice of forming regional or bilateral agreementsfor resource sharing, law libraries could form a national consortium through whicha centralized collection would be established. The TALLO consortium would serveas a kind of jointly owned acquisitions department for member libraries. The dis-cussion here is limited to a collection of print and microform acquisitions anddonations

With each purchase decision,libraries risk either losing future access to databases (including retrospective con-tent) and experiencing greater restrictions on use through license terms than are

I believe it is possible to build a digital library thatrespects both of the intended beneficiaries of the Copyright Clause—copyrightowners and society—while testing commonly held assumptions about the limita-tions of copyright law. In balancing these goals, TALLO permits circulation of theexact number of copies purchased, thereby acknowledging the rights inherent incopyright, but it liberates the form of circulation from the print format.

academic law libraries pool resources, through a consortium, to create a centralizedcollection of legal materials, including copyrighted materials, and to digitize thosematerials for easy, cost-effective access by all consortium members. For the sake ofexpediency, this proposal will be referred to here as TALLO (Taking Academic LawLibraries Online) and the proposed consortium as the TALLO consortium.

An oracle is a conventional program which runs off the blockchain and which periodically publishes information about the world onto the blockchain. The problem is trust. Using an oracle turns your clever blockchain program into a fairly pointless appendage to the much more important (and subjective) conventional program: the one which is interpreting the world and drawing conclusions.

If people have been doing international transfers for a thousand years, why are they still so complicated? The reason is largely KYC/AML, the compliance processes that the world financial system uses to ensure you aren't transferring money to economically sanctioned individuals, criminals, terrorists, etc. Banks won't send money to just anywhere, they first want to check that it's not at risk of going to the baddies. This can take a long time and often requires exchange of lots of complicated documents. Any blockchain-based financial transfer system that grows in popularity will be pressured by governments to implement KYC/AML and will then start to resemble traditional international transfers, except with higher charges and smaller economies of scale. Many Bitcoin brokerages have long since required identity verification for the account owner. Some are starting to require details of who you're sending money to.

The best way to ensure that you’re licensing a solution that will interoperate with other solutions and conform tonecessary standards is to build that understanding into your signed contract.

Include a CC0 or CC-BY statement in the data (including MARC records) you create. Here’s an example from theUniversity of Florida:588 _ _ $a This bibliographic record is available under the Creative Commons CC0 “No Rights Reserved”license. The University of Florida Libraries, as creator of this bibliographic record, has waived all rights to itworldwide under copyright law, including all related and neighboring rights, to the extent allowed by law.

Libraries should reestablish a professional investment in technology. This requires a shift in mind-set, where the “waitand see” approach of library led projects within the open source arena should be instead fed and funded within thepublic funding model, otherwise we will perpetually delay our own empowerment. As stated earlier in this report,libraries should be asking “why not open source?” as a primary question early in the procurement process. If it’s notfeasible to develop in-house resources, partnering with a vendor who supports open source (so long as that vendorhas a commitment to the long-term success of the overall open source community) may be a good option. Or workwith groups of libraries, consortia, or collaborations between consortia to build investment in skills

This shift in funding may require shifts inlibrary procurement rules (e.g., rethinking RFP requirements to consider open source solutions; exploring models tofund open source development pre-adoption), so in the short term we recommend working within existingorganizations.

We cannot continueoperating with a status quo mentality and expect to achieve a different result. A paradigm shift is needed in howlibraries allocate our increasingly limited funds. Our budgets are currently beholden to maintaining the status quo,usually with vendors whose pricing increases annually. Rather than continuing to fund proprietary development, wepropose reallocating a portion of what we expend with those vendors for deliberate investment in library-created orcommunity-owned solutions.

In addition, open source solutions are “community-owned” or licensed by a community with a direct stake in thatsolution’s remaining open and available to others.

Providers supporting open source systems can be a useful entry point for libraries thatmay not have the resources to do in-house development but still wish to move to an open source solution. It is criticalto ensure that those vendors support the larger open source project community and contribute their work back to theoriginal code base.

These trends are further exacerbated by a dwindling supply of library personnel and the professional expertisenecessary to support library infrastructure in-house. Even the largest and most successful information technologycompanies struggle to hire and keep the technologists and software developers they need; libraries aredisadvantaged in attracting and retaining individuals and software support from this same pool of talent. This perfectstorm has led to a critical lack of capability and capacity and “learned helplessness” in the face of increasinglyprivatized information, the politicization of knowledge, and the commoditization of analytics and other services.

In the United States, funding is woefully inadequate across the library sector. The global Covid-19 pandemic hasexposed everything that was not working well (or at all) but was papered over with good intentions. The blunt traumaof decades of disinvestment in the public sector, particularly in education, has left libraries lacking many of the coreresources necessary to function effectively. While libraries can and should continue to advocate for additional funding,current political climates, an uncertain economy, the declining number of high school graduates across many regions,and the continuing fallout from the pandemic mean that increased funding is unlikely in most cases. Library workersdedicated to the profession of literacy and equal access to information are now called on to defend traditionalprinciples with few resources to ward off assaults.

Underpinning all these strategies is a recognition that libraries – even the largest, best-funded ones – mustcollaborate to accomplish their missions. Conversely, even the smallest, poorly-funded libraries can be valuedcontributors to these efforts. Consortia can play a unique role in this undertaking, working with all their libraries –however big or small, no matter their funding – to identify strategies that work for their libraries and bring themtogether to regain collective agency, power, and control.

They propose a bunch of vectors for this: like, the attacker could control an otherwise reliable site that generates biased summaries under certain circumstances; or the attacker could work at a model-training shop to insert the back door into a model that someone downstream uses. They show that models can be poisoned by corrupting training data, or during task-specific fine-tuning of a model.

There's no market for a machine-learning autopilot, or content moderation algorithm, or loan officer, if all it does is cough up a recommendation for a human to evaluate. Either that system will work so poorly that it gets thrown away, or it works so well that the inattentive human just button-mashes "OK" every time a dialog box appears.

After cornering the market on entertainment, TikTok began offering its model of behavioral tracking and algorithmic suggestion to advertisers, promising them a way to know which ads people find most compelling without having to ask. It was an instant hit: The company’s ad revenue tripled this year, to $12 billion, according to eMarketer estimates, and is expected to eclipse YouTube at nearly $25 billion by 2025. In the United States, the cost to advertisers for TikTok’s premium real estate — the first commercial break a viewer sees in their feed, known as a “TopView” — has jumped to $3 million a day.

TikTokers are increasingly using the app as a visual search tool; 40 percent of Generation Z respondents to a Google survey this year said they had opened TikTok or Instagram, not Google, when searching for nearby lunch spots. (One tweet in June, “I don’t Google anymore I TikTok,” has been ‘liked’ 120,000 times.)And as Americans’ trust in news organizations has fallen, TikTok’s role as a news source has climbed. One in three TikTok viewers in the United States said they regularly use it to learn about current events, Pew Research Center said last month. In the United Kingdom, it’s the fastest-growing news source for adults.

The average number of hours each American user spent every day on TikTok exploded 67 percent between 2018 and 2021, while Facebook and YouTube grew less than 10 percent, investment analysts at Bernstein Research wrote in an August report. TikTok has replaced “the friction of deciding what to watch,” the researchers said, with a “sensory rush of bite-sized videos … delivering endorphin hit after hit.”

TikTok starts studying its users from the moment they first open the app. It shows them a single, full-screen, infinitely looping video, then gauges how they react: a second of viewing or hesitation indicates interest; a swipe suggests a desire for something else. With every data point, TikTok’s algorithm narrows from a shapeless mass of content to a refined, irresistible feed. It is the ultimate video channel, and this is its one program.The “For You” algorithm, as TikTok calls it, gradually builds profiles of users’ tastes not from what they choose but how they behave. While Facebook and other social networks rely on their users to define themselves by typing in their interests or following famous people, TikTok watches and learns, tapping into trends and desires their users might not identify.

Even as the app has transformed into a public square for news and conversation, TikTok’s opaque systems of promotion and suppression fuel worries that China’s aggressive model of internet control could warp what appears there. Many users already are self-censoring, adopting a second language of code words — “unalive,” not dead; “procedure,” not abortion — in hopes of dodging the app’s censors and preserving their chances at online fame.

former TikTok employees and technical experts argue that the company’s fixes do nothing to address its biggest risk: that its top decision-makers work in a country skilled at using the web to spread propaganda, surveil the public, gain influence and squash dissent. That crisis of trust has led to an ongoing debate among U.S. regulators: whether to more closely monitor the app or ban it outright.

No app has grown faster past a billion users, and more than 100 million of them are in the United States, roughly a third of the country. The average American viewer watches TikTok for 80 minutes a day — more than the time spent on Facebook and Instagram, combined.

How TikTok ate the internetThe world’s most popular app has pioneered a new age of instant attention. Can we trust it?By Drew HarwellOct. 14

The paper, published Wednesday in Nature Communications, represents the first findings of an ongoing study into long covid — the Long-CISS (Covid in Scotland Study).

THE COURT: No, but they want -- you are using it as apromotional advantage by providing the service to yourcustomers. I think that's -- I think that's really obvious,isn't it?MS. RODMAN: We're using it because our customers areasking for it, and by giving our customers the tools that theyare asking for, we build good --THE COURT: And you make it -- if you make yourcustomers happy, presumably you'll get more customers.MS. RODMAN: Exactly, but that's not --

THE COURT: All right. In fact, what you are doing, Ithink, is you are developing a database of information toprovide to libraries in competition with OCLC.MS. RODMAN: No, Your Honor, absolutely not

And given that we're talking about this interference interms of a contract claim, we have to keep going back to thelanguage of the policy at issue, and that language says -- andI'm going to quote it if the Court will bear with me because Ithink it's important -- that the members have the right -- andit uses the word "right" in the rights section -- members whohave extracted WorldCat data representing, or enriching therecords for, their own holdings from the WorldCat database havethe right to: transfer or make available such data to other

And I'm having trouble with a lack ofspecificity as to which records your subscribers are free toprovide -- because they created them or someone other than OCLCcreated them and -- and how the Court is going to be able todetermine in a -- in a group of data, even with an OCN numberattached to it, whether it is something that the -- yoursubscriber is -- has freedom to release or does not under yoursubscriber agreemen

OCLC has no proprietary interest in this metadata. Ithas no proprietary interest in the OCN number. In fact, OCLChas been very clear over the years that it wants the OCN numberto remain attached to records even when they are in thesubscriber's own catalog and they are not WorldCat records, andit wants that so that it can always go back to that record,that OCN number can pull in any additional information thatwill enhance the WorldCat record, and OCLC has declared thatthe OCN number can be treated as they are in the public domainsince 2013, and at the same time, since 2013, OCLC expresslydisavowed the OCN number being used as an indication that arecord originated with OCLC and was, therefore, subject to itsmember agreement.

the term "enhancement" I think is a bit of a misnomer. Youhave to understand where this data comes from.When OCLC creates a record, it is pulling metadata fromother sources, from public sources, from libraries themselves,from the Library of Congress, from publishers. Almost all ofthe metadata in an OCLC record comes from sources other thanOCLC. OCLC pulls that in, and they add an OCN number, which isjust a sequential number.

Do you assign OCN numbers to all the data that you have,including data created by your subscribers?MS. MARTINEZ: We put an OCN number on any record thatOCLC enhances.So if it comes into their database and they are going toenhance it by -- kind of similarly to what I talked about onTuesday to the Court, you know, if they are going to addheadnotes or footnotes -- I'm sorry -- head notes, you know,pagination, they are going to change the way that the record issearched.

THE COURT: How would you define a catalog?MS. MARTINEZ: So it depends, I think, on thesubscriber, because they can be different, but initiallywhen -- before a customer comes to WorldCat, obviously, theywill have their own records that haven't been touched orenhanced or cared for through the WorldCat process.

Your book is going to meet the fate of most books, and be barely read. Reportedly one-percent of books sell more than 5000 copies.

The structure and economics of publishing make absolutely no sense as a business at any level. We pretend that this isn’t the case, but as the PRH/S&S trial turned to what happens to books that go up for “auction,” it became clear that all the valuations attached to particular books are simply made up. If a publisher decides they want a book, they just keep offering more until they have it. PRH, the company with the biggest war chest, is the winner most often. If it absorbs Simon & Schuster, it will win even more often. The merger itself is a highly rational move to create an entity that is simply larger, capable of making more big bets, reaping the rewards of the good guesses, and being better cushioned for the bad ones.

I’m actually attempting to run this newsletter on a patronage model. All of the content is free and subscriptions are purely voluntary, expressions of support for the work that receive no additional goods in exchange. The Substack algorithm tells me that if I made the content exclusive to subscribers, rather than making it free, I would increase my revenue by somewhere around 50%. At the same time, my readership would be maybe 1/8th its current size. I’ve consciously chosen readership over revenue because, A. the additional money wouldn’t really make a significant difference to my day-to-day existence, and B. knowing that I might have a few thousand people read this (as opposed to a few hundred) helps motivate me to do the work.

While money derived from markets is necessary at some point, the support of the art and artist is not subject to markets, but instead falls under the category of “patronage,” where the artist with the second job is a kind of self-patron.

there is a similar exchange going on when you borrow a book from the library. In fact, libraries are specifically designed to remove the market from the equation entirely, which is why people who use libraries - even though libraries are free - are referred to as “patrons.”

The most prominent public patrons of books in my lifetime are Dolly Parton and Oprah Winfrey. Dolly Parton’s Imagination Library has gifted over 185 million books to children. Oprah’s Book Club not only moved millions of copies, but helped build a reading culture are big, literary books. Oprah’s book club episodes were routinely among her lowest rated, but she didn’t care.