Tag Archives: Internet

Algeria bans internet access to stop exam cheats


Internet access has been cut in Algeria today to try to stop students cheating in their baccalaureate exams.

Access is being restricted for the first hour of the exams each day, then at other hours throughout the day, in a bid to prevent information about the questions being shared on social media.

All internet-connected devices have been banned from exam centres this year, not just for the students, but for school staff as well.

Algeria’s baccalaureate was hugely compromised in 2016 by a wide-ranging operation in which questions were leaked both before and during the exams.

By Socceruncle

Advertisements

What Europe have learn on data law


When Europe’s new data law, the General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR), went into force on May 25, it pushed a decades-long global debate over privacy and the proper regulatory guardrails for the commercial use of people’s information on the internet to the front pages of newspapers all over the world.

As a result of the regulation’s European origins, some members of both the industry and the media are still under the impression that GDPR is somehow a “Europe issue”. It is not. It is a global call for those of us who collect, use, or distribute people’s information to rethink how we engage with the end consumer. There are also other takeaways for all stakeholders – governments interested in passing their own legislation, data dependent companies and industries, website operators and publishers, and the internet’s users themselves .

1. It’s about alternative solutions that will work for everyone

The first of these lessons is not to conclude that Europe has an aggressive regulatory philosophy and therefore there is nothing to be gained from assessing how the GDPR was constructed. It’s actually in part about how those of us that were concerned about the legislation approached influencing the outcome. Legislators and regulators in the United States and other countries are free to make law — good, bad, and in between — and they will continue to do so. The first lesson from the GDPR experience should be that standing in opposition to regulatory action or ideas for consumer and privacy protection in the digital age without providing widely acceptable alternative solutions to the concerns of consumers will not work.

The GDPR was one idea for constructing rules of the road for the treatment of people’s data that would give them greater comfort. It is the result of political pressure from European consumer concerns with commercial data practices that they believe lack transparency or adequate governance and the sense on the part of European legislators that they had to act to protect fundamental rights. Now that it is law, we should work cooperatively and collaboratively with thought leaders in the region to implement the regulation in a tempered and reasonable manner.

As technology and data dependent industries, we must also listen and rise to the challenge to put the consumer and his/or her interests first, independent of GDPR and in anticipation of regulatory and legal proposals to come. We should not limit ourselves to “check-the-box” compliance with every law, nor should we engage in expensive jurisdiction-by-jurisdiction battles to beat back new data-restriction proposals. Instead, we should provide alternative constructs for consumer protection for the digital age that are more flexible and enabling of innovation than the GDPR is in parts while simultaneously doing as good or a better job of putting consumers in charge of their digital experiences and identity. We should do that through self-regulatory work, public-private cooperation, and an open approach to the modernization of existing law.

2. It’s about both give and take

To help construct this new social contract for the digital age, we should commit to creating an online marketplace in which the rights and needs of both digital market actors and consumers are respected. We don’t need government to force us to do this. We can do it by right-sizing the exchange of value in the ecosystem and making it much more transparent and explicit. We are asking for consumers’ attention and time, so in return we must offer ad experiences that respect people’s digital dignity and enrich, entertain, inform, and educate them.

3. It’s about understanding that the internet is global, not local

Countries from Brazil to Australia, as well as US states including California, are considering to copy GDPR, or writing similar legislation. Much of it could be better constructed and too much of it is premised on the idea that data sharing itself is bad. Nonetheless, this rise in policymaker concerns and proposals represents a powerful call for individual digital empowerment. Consumers across the globe are raising their voices and asking for a better deal online. The digital ecosystem had better answer their calls. Setting aside potential new laws and regulation, one needs only look at the rising tide of ad blocking to hear what consumers want. Global consumer behaviour, like the internet itself, is not dependent upon, nor confined to, any particular geographic regulatory schema.

4. It’s about the user and the consumer, not the country or company

To win the support of the public and their representatives for the continued development of a globally data-driven economy, we must all embrace a consumer-first ethos. We must engage in a transparent dialogue with users and treat their information in a manner that the average person can reasonably be expected to understand and embrace. That is a fair challenge, and it is the galvanizing spirit of the GDPR and other proposals.

In partial response to the call from Europe, and in accordance with GDPR, the IAB Europe has created a Transparency and Consent Framework that provides a viable way to respect GDPR without hindering digital commerce. This is an example of addressing consumer and policymaker concerns in good faith. We should urge all actors in the digital economy to embrace it. It creates a mechanism for website operators to make clear to consumers which other digital actors are involved in the protection of consumer data and for what purposes. It offers consumers the choice whether or not to distribute that data to those actors for those uses. Beyond that, securing the information we hold and enabling people to ask for their records to be deleted are also reasonable demands, with which we should comply without complaint.

5. Lessons on what not to do

But as we consider the future of digital commerce, there are some truly bad ideas that the call for consumer protection is leading some policymakers to embrace. For example, we should seriously consider – whether under the GDPR or any other law – if legislators should force companies to provide services for free that they now provide in exchange for people’s information. Barring that specific service being a human right or utility, that is a step too far.

Website publishers should not be made to provide access to the content on a news website or to a service like social networking for free when someone chooses not to engage in the value exchange of data for services. People should have the choice not to have their data used without their consent but not the choice to free ride off the information of others and access services for free. We don’t believe that is fair. We hope that those who interpret GDPR, or are considering similar laws in their own jurisdictions, will take this on board.

It is currently unclear in both the GDPR and the current draft of upcoming European ePrivacy rules whether or not companies will be able to charge people anything if they choose not to engage in the value exchange of data for services. The assertion is that consumers should be able to bar access to their data without penalty and many are interpreting charging for services in any way as a penalty. In the current draft of the California ballot initiative under consideration for November it explicitly states that companies have to allow those free use of their services by consumers that refuse to provide access to their data. The internet and the services it delivers are amazing and prolific, but they are not free. It is bad precedent and bad policy to mandate how a service can or cannot be monetized or how a person can or cannot compensate a service provider for that service. Companies need to monetize services to operate. And for people to continue accessing services on the internet without having to reach for their wallets each time, websites have to have the ability to negotiate for access to data in order to best finance currently cash payment free services.

There is no doubt that commerce on the internet under GDPR and other similar proposals will get more challenging. Some companies won’t be able to make the transition, and the companies that survive and adapt to new law and consumer demands will have to rise to a higher standard. But we cannot throw the baby out with the bath water – and nor do we think that is anybody’s intent. Using, analyzing and distributing people’s data to create, monetize, and deliver services has fueled the rise of a global digital economy with very low barriers to entry and participation. It has served as an incredible engine for the democratization of commerce and conversation. We can come to mutually agreed standards and processes for ensuring its continued progress and enabling its financing – through multiple mechanisms, including permissioned advertising – while also giving people more control over their own information and data.

The World Economic Forum is a great platform on which to have this dialogue. As is the OECD, think tanks like the German Marshall Fund, your national legislatures, regulatory bodies, and self-regulatory and multi-stakeholder organizations.

GDPR is not the end of the global and national discussions and deliberations over people’s privacy in the digital age nor is it a silver bullet solution that should be cut and pasted into other jurisdictions. It is one idea that European legislators and regulators have worked hard to construct. Those companies operating in Europe, including my own, should respect and comply with it. And we should all evaluate it, engage with its implementation, and think about what might work just as well or even better elsewhere in the world for the sake of protecting people and enabling innovation and commerce in our still developing information society.

SOURCE: World Economic Forum

By Daniel Sepulveda

Google pledges not to develop AI weapons


 

Google.jpg© Provided by The Telegraph Google pledges not to develop AI weapons

Google has pledged not to use its artificial intelligence technology in military weapons or anything that might weaken human rights in a set of principles announced on Thursday.

This commitment follows protests from staff over the US military’s research into using Google’s vision recognition systems to help guide drones.

Google insisted last week that its AI technology is not being used to help drones identify human targets, but told employees that it would no renew its contract after it expires in 2019.

Google chief executive Sundar Pichai said: “We want to be clear that while we are not developing AI for use in weapons, we will continue our work with governments and the military in many other areas.

“These collaborations are important and we’ll actively look for more ways to augment the critical work of these organizations and keep service members and civilians safe.”

Mr Pichai did not explain how Google would reach decisions about when to limit the use of AI, but added the company was not coming up with “theoretical concepts”. He said “They are concrete standards that will actively govern our research and product development and will impact our business decisions.”

The new AI principles follow weeks of protest from over 3,000 Google employees over “Project Maven”, an programme with the US Pentagon on AI for drones.

Miles Brundage, a Research Fellow at the University of Oxford, said on Twitter: “A bit vague in places, they don’t exclude offensive cyber security or anti-materiel autonomous weapons but it’s a start.”

The principles clearly state that Google will not work on AI for weapons but they also leave room for interpretation for company executives and allow Google to work for the military.

Among its objectives, the projects aim is to develop and integrate “computer-vision algorithms needed to help military and civilian analysts.”

In an open letter from Google employees to Mr. Pichai, employees expressed concern that the military could weaponize AI. “We believe that Google should not be in the business of war…Google’s unique history and its direct reach to the lives of billions of user set it apart.”

The principles also address a much broader range of concerns. Mr Pichai pledges to avoid creating systems that reinforce “societal biases on gender race or sexual orientation,” and says that privacy safeguards should be incorporated into AI.

Source: The Telegraph

Rwanda: Student discovers prototype that enables Whatsapp calls without internet



Rwanda: Student discovers prototype that enables Whatsapp calls without internet

A third-year Rwandan student has discovered a network prototype that will enable WhatsApp users to make internal and international calls without the internet. Deodate Mugenzi, a 26-year-old is pursuing Information and Communication Technology at the Polytechnic Regional Centre in Kigali Rwanda.

According to a report by The New Times, Mugenzi says that the prototype development was perpetuated by the need of Africans to converse with friends and family members globally. The idea generation began in 2017 but the future is promising to have a life-changing impact on the lives of people worldwide. Furthermore, the innovation started from playing with laptop to a vigorous library research using physics and computer as key arsenals.

The student conducted intensive research based on IT skills gained in class and from Physics books. The whole system operates using optic physics, mobile gadget communication techniques, and networking principles. The computer system allows users of popular internet application, WhatsApp to directly call mobile phone numbers.

In order to use the platform, users have to be registered. The platform has attracted several telecommunication firms who expressed their interest in buying the idea for further development. Mugenzi also partners with American embassy to offer innovative training to several young people in Rwanda.

“The problem is that many people here in Rwanda and other parts of Africa cannot afford to own smartphones that enable them to use all these internet enabled services. To address this, people ought to use services that allow them communicate using any platform that is available to them,” said Mugenzi.

Source: itnewsafrica.com

Woman asks the internet for advice after sleeping with her best friend, the responses were unkind


image

A 23 year old heartbroken woman who turned to
Reddit for advice after sleeping with her best
friend of ten years didn’t expect the type of
responses she got from the social media site.
She said her bestfriend fled her house saying ‘I
can’t do this’ after they hooked up.
The woman, who did not give her name gave
intimate details about her relationship with the
said best friend named Paul, also 23. She said:
‘Paul and I have been best friends for
years. Throughout our friendship, we’ve
flirted, but he’s always been in serious
relationships with someone else. I’ve
been his shoulder to cry on throughout it
all.
‘Our friendship has always been strictly
platonic with moments of slip-ups.’
She talked about how he had been in several
dysfunctional relationships with controlling
partners, saying that she had always been there
for him after his breakups.
Adding:
‘I was his support system. We grew very
close over the next few months. We had
history of cuddling and holding hands,
but nothing progressed beyond that.
One night, he came over to watch a
movie and he looked me in the eyes. He
leaned in to kiss me when he stopped
and basically ran out of my house saying
‘I can’t do this. It will ruin everything
between us.’
He didn’t speak to me for a week and
got back with his girlfriend thereafter. I
told him in person I couldn’t do it
anymore and I felt used. He responded
‘Okay’ and went on his marry way.He
didn’t even care and I was crushed.
She said she managed to rekindle her friendship
with Paul but Paul had found another girlfriend
who was studying overseas. She said he flirted
with her but their relationship remained platonic
until another one of Paul’s relationship ended
again.
She wrote:
‘We ended up getting drunk with some of
our friends and he came to spend the
night at my place.
‘When we got into the bed, he grabbed
me and we started making out. He told
me he had always had feelings for me
and he likes me (…) Well, he kept
pushing sex and we ended up sleeping
together. When I went to fall asleep, he
grabbed me and said out of all things, he
would miss me in his arms.’
‘He called me the next day and acted like
nothing happened. He said he was just
drunk and horny, but now that the sexual
tension was out of the way, we could go
back to being just friends. He said he
doesn’t remember most of the night.’
She said: ‘The cats out of the bag. It’s
going to be very hard to see him just as
a friend now that we know there’s this
between us.’
After reading the story Reddit users weighed in
to share their thoughts, and most posters
advised the young woman to end her friendship
with Paul permanently. Some of the comments:
Others really didn’t mince their words.
Theborogrove wrote: ‘HE IS MIND******** YOU.
He is NOT your friend’
Gonzoimperial said: ‘You’re his safety girl. He’s
going to keep doing this until he’s 35 and then
he might settle for you. Please don’t do this.’
Others really didn’t mince their words.
‘You were a booty call,’ said Barntobebad,
‘Sorry, but his friendship with you isn’t as strong
as you think, nor is his attraction.’
Damaged Damsel said: ‘it’s more like he strings
you along so that you will always be there when
he is single. Move on.’
Another wrote: ‘HE IS MIND******** YOU. He is
NOT your friend. He is using you to gratify he is
ego.’
Some called into question whether Paul really is
the poster’s friend after all.
User expressed a wish for the poster to avoid
being messed around by Paul any longer
One user compared the story to the novel One
Day by romance writer David Nicholls
Addywoot said: ‘I don’t really get the feeling
he’s even that good of a friend to you.’
Pretendingtobenormal write: ‘This is not how I
would treat my best friend.’
Isayfiesta encouraged the poster to focus on
herself, instead of the state of her friendship
with Paul.
‘The cycle will repeat as much as you let it.
Take the reins back and make an intentional
effort to move on with your life, whether that is
dating other people or doing something to
explore or improve yourself.
‘A little boost in self-esteem can go a long, long
way,’ they advised.
MrsValentine said: ‘I don’t believe based on his
actions that he truly cares about you as a
girlfriend OR a friend.
Look, you had sex – it happens, no big deal, and
at least you know how things stand now. I’d
look at closing this 10 year chapter if I were
you. You’ve got more to look forward to than
being messed around by this guy for another
decade.
Suckmy**** said: ‘This reminds me so much of
the movie/book One Day. But much less
nuanced.’
Let’s just hope this final Reddit user’s name
isn’t an omen.

Published By Ikem Daniel {ChosenOne}

Everyone Should Have Access to Internet said by Mark Zuckerberg!


Mark Zuckerberg said Everyone in the world should have access to the internet which is truth.

image

That’s why we launched Internet.org with so many different initiatives — including extending networks through solar-powered planes, satellites and lasers, providing free data access through Free Basics, reducing data use through apps, and empowering local entrepreneurs through Express Wi-Fi.

Today India’s telecom regulator decided to restrict programs that provide free access to data. This restricts one of Internet.org’s initiatives, Free Basics, as well as programs by other organizations that provide free access to data.

While we’re disappointed with today’s decision, I want to personally communicate that we are committed to keep working to break down barriers to connectivity in India and around the world. Internet.org has many initiatives, and we will keep working until everyone has access to the internet.

Our work with Internet.org around the world has already improved many people’s lives. More than 19 million people in 38 countries have been connected through our different programs.

Connecting India is an important goal we won’t give up on, because more than a billion people in India don’t have access to the internet. We know that connecting them can help lift people out of poverty, create millions of jobs and spread education opportunities. We care about these people, and that’s why we’re so committed to connecting them.

Our mission is to make the world more open and connected. That mission continues, and so does our commitment to India.

Posted from Ikem Daniel

(ISBlog) update you with Inspiration, Home Remedy, Entertainment, Politic, Lifestyle, Fashion, Celebrity, etc.

%d bloggers like this: