Musk at Twitter has ‘huge work’ ahead to comply with EU rules, warns bloc

European Union regulators have fired another warning shot at Elon Musk over his erratic piloting of Twitter since his takeover last month — saying he has “huge work” ahead if the social media site is to avoid falling foul of major new governance rules for digital services which entered into force earlier this month.

Reminder: Breaches of the EU’s Digital Services Act (DSA) can attract penalties of up to 6% of global annual turnover.

Since getting his hands on the bird, Musk has fired the top team and made slashing Twitter’s headcount a priority — with reports of 50% cuts early this month, and further sackings since (including of a large number of contractors). He’s also reversed the prior leadership’s ban on former US president Donald Trump’s Twitter account and suggested he’ll implement a general amnesty for accounts previously suspended for violating its policies — all the while engaging in public boosterism with a small group of mostly far right Twitter accounts, which can be seen egging him on to tear down content moderation systems and policies the company had painstakingly built up over years.

The change of ownership at Twitter has also led to the departures of a number of senior compliance, security, privacy and trust & safety staffers in a few short weeks. And there has been a stream of users leaving to other social media platforms — objecting to the direction Musk’s taking the site and a resurgence in toxicity and abuse since he took over which is also leading advertisers to cool on Twitter over brand safety concerns.

So the EU’s assessment that Musk-owned Twitter has its work cut out to comply with the DSA is not exactly rocket science.

Putting out its read on the outcome of a meeting today between Musk and the EU’s internal market commissioner, Thierry Breton — who obtained a ‘thumbs up’ from the billionaire, back in May, verbally affirming the bloc’s plan for Internet regulation that the EU is tenaciously interpreting as a bona fide commitment to DSA compliance — the EU said Breton told Musk that Twitter will have to significantly increase efforts if it’s to pass the grade.

In a statement attributed to Breton after the meeting, the commissioner said (emphasis Breton’s):

“I welcome Elon Musk’s statements of intent to get Twitter 2.0 ready for the DSA. I am pleased to hear that he has read it carefully and considers it as a sensible approach to implement on a worldwide basis. But let’s also be clear that there is still huge work ahead, as Twitter will have to implement transparent user policies, significantly reinforce content moderation and protect freedom of speech, tackle disinformation with resolve, and limit targeted advertising. All of this requires sufficient AI and human resources, both in volumes and skills. I look forward to progress in all these areas and we will come to assess Twitter’s readiness on site.”

The DSA will start to apply from February 17 next year for larger platforms (so called ‘very large online platforms’; or VLOPs) — which also face extra obligations including to assess and mitigate risks on their platforms under the regulation.

This means larger platforms have just a few months to prepare themselves to be able to demonstrate compliance or risk enforcement by the European Commission. For other in-scope services the DSA will start to apply in early 2024 — and enforcement will fall to Member State authorities, rather than the Commission itself.

It’s not yet clear whether Twitter will be designated a VLOP. But as we reported last week, the EU’s executive responded to reports of further layoffs, including the total shuttering of its Brussels office, with alarm — warning that “appropriateness” of resources is one of the factors it will be taking into account as it determines which platforms are designated VLOPs and therefore face an accelerated timeline for compliance, additional requirements and greater regulatory risk.

In a post put out by Twitter today, on its official blog, the company claimed it remains committed to its existing policies — however it said its approach to policy enforcement “will rely more heavily on de-amplification of violative content”, aka “freedom of speech but not freedom of reach”.

Earlier this week it also emerged that the platform has stopped enforcing its policy against misleading information about COVID-19 last week — letting unsubstantiated claims with the potential to endanger public health circulate freely.

The Commission quickly described Twitter’s decision to abandon enforcement against misleading tweets about COVID-19 as regrettable — pointing out the pandemic is not over and warning that measures to tackle disinformation will be an important component of achieving compliance with the DSA.

The episode raises questions about what EU regulators will make of baldly disingenuous claims put out by Musk — such as that ‘no Twitter polices have changed’ — when an unchanged policy that’s no longer being enforced is, de facto, a drastic change of policy.

The question is whether the EU will take an officially dim view, in its role as DSA enforcer, of such obvious contradictions — and find a breach of the regulation. Or blink and let the billionaire get away with giggling as he ignores their rules. 

In an interview yesterday at the Knight Foundation conference, covered by Reuters, Twitter’s form head of trust & safety, Yoel Roth, warned the company is not safer under Musk — with far fewer staff to enforce its policies. He said his own decision to leave Twitter, after a few weeks with Musk in charge, came after the company began to stray from an adherence to written and publicly available policies — toward content decisions made unilaterally by the self-appointed ‘Chief Twit’. “One of my limits was if Twitter starts being ruled by dictatorial edict rather than by policy… there’s no longer a need for me in my role, doing what I do,” he said.

The EU will soon have to make its own call about Musk’s approach to policy.

Some might say Musk is already trolling the EU with empty claims of ‘DSA compliance’ at the same time as liquidating the resources required to achieve compliance. At the very least he appears to be testing the ground to see what he can get away with. 

The EU’s read out of Breton’s working meeting with Musk does call it “constructive” — but that might just be the EU trolling Musk at this point (actually got a meeting and a date in the diary for another one? winning!) — as it writes that they both “agreed” that the Commission’s services will carry out a stress test at Twitter’s headquarters in early 2023.

Ergo, the the EU is already preparing to test Musk (and stress test his claims of compliance). Which means he’s getting accelerated ‘special attention’ from the Internet’s newly appointed sheriff. (Frankly Meta’s Mark Zuckerberg must be counting his blessings over Musk’s landing in his toxic patch.)

The Commission said this stress test will allow Twitter to “target compliance even ahead of legal deadlines, and to prepare for an extensive independent audit as provided by the DSA”. Translation: Get your house in order fast — because we’ll be back for the receipts.

Whether Musk will keep shrugging off — or finally get serious — about all these increasingly shrill soundings from regulators will be interesting to watch.

If the former, the final bill for Musk owning Twitter could get a lot more expensive.

Musk at Twitter has ‘huge work’ ahead to comply with EU rules, warns bloc by Natasha Lomas originally published on TechCrunch


from https://ift.tt/6kqNZ9n
via Technews
Share:

T-minus 72 hours left to save on passes to TC Sessions: Space

We’re getting ready to launch a price hike, but you still have time — 72 hours to be precise — to attend TC Sessions: Space 2022 on December 6 in Los Angeles for $199. Will you be in the room?

Click, register and save: Space tech may come with a jaw-dropping price tag, but this space conference doesn’t. Buy your pass before December 2 at 11:59 p.m. PST — prices go up to $495 at midnight. Why pay more if you don’t have to?

Let’s take a gander at just some programming we have lined up for the day. Check out the event agenda for specifics on all the speakers, topics and times.

TechCrunch Space Pitch-off: You can improve your own pitch by watching how the VC judges react and by the questions they ask. It’s a window into what might make them decide to schedule a meeting with you. We’ll announce the competitors soon, and they’ll have to deliver their very best to impress our panel of expert judges: Jory Bell (Playground Global), Mark Boggett (Seraphim Space), Tess Hatch (Bessemer Ventures) and Emily Henriksson (Root Ventures).

Gearing Up the Next Generation of Scientists, Explorers and Robots: As chief technologist of NASA’s Science Mission Directorate, Carolyn Mercer has her finger on the pulse across countless projects to explore and understand our planet and solar system. As priorities and methods shift in the Artemis era, Mercer can speak to how tech helps us move forward and how NASA’s unique insights and well of talent can put it to use.

Space Station Shake-up: Commercial space stations are all the rage these days, especially with the mission end in sight for the existing ISS. Blue Origin has announced Orbital Reef, a “mixed-use business park” in low Earth orbit. We’ll talk with Shahir Gerges — director of business strategy at Orbital Reef, Blue Origin — about the orbital economy and what we can expect from privately operated successors to the ISS.

Of course you’ll have plenty of time during the day for networking. The event app makes it easy to find and connect with the people who can drive your mission forward. Use it to schedule meetings in advance, on the fly — or you can roll old-school, like, you know, strike up a conversation in the exhibition area or between sessions. You never know what opportunities a brief meeting or casual conversation might present.

TC Sessions: Space 2022 takes place on December 6 in Los Angeles, but you have only three days left until that $199 deal leaves orbit. Buy your pass by December 2 at 11:59 p.m. PST. The price increases to $495 at midnight. Don’t space out on serious savings!

Is your company interested in sponsoring or exhibiting at TC Sessions: Space? Contact our sponsorship sales team by filling out this form.

 

T-minus 72 hours left to save on passes to TC Sessions: Space by Lauren Simonds originally published on TechCrunch


from https://ift.tt/Kpb41UC
via Technews
Share:

Apple’s iOS 16.1.2 update just dropped with security fixes and crash detection improvements

Apple rolled out iOS 16.1.2 on Wednesday, citing updates involving user security. Apple hasn’t yet detailed the nature of the security updates, as the company doesn’t disclose security issues until after they’ve been investigated or patched.

The update also includes improved compatibility with wireless carriers, as well as crash detection optimizations for iPhone 14 and iPhone 14 Pro models. Crash detection, which was announced at Apple’s September event, is a new feature that triggers Emergency SOS if it suspects you’ve been in a crash. While this feature could be life-saving in certain situations, users have reported issues in which crash detection is falsely triggered while riding roller coasters. Apple doesn’t outright name the roller coaster issue in its patch notes, but it’s a bug that’s been on adrenaline-seeking customers’ minds.

To update to the latest version of iOS, navigate to your iPhone’s settings. Then, click “general.” At the top of your screen, you should see a tab called “software updates” that will allow you to check for new versions of iOS.

Apple’s iOS 16.1.2 update just dropped with security fixes and crash detection improvements by Amanda Silberling originally published on TechCrunch


from https://ift.tt/KyC2vSg
via Technews
Share:

Antaris predicts the future of the space economy at TC Sessions: Space

We’re just about one week away from achieving liftoff for TC Sessions: Space — a full day jam-packed with the latest space science, tech and trends. Join us on December 6 in Los Angeles to hear from and connect with the startups, researchers, investors and technologists forging the future of space.

A word (or two or three) about our partner companies. They play a vital role at TechCrunch events. As subject-matter experts, they show up and present sessions with relevant content designed to help early-stage founders succeed. And yes, we’re about to showcase one of them.

Beat the price hike: The moon is not made of cheese, but if you act quickly enough, you’ll save a chunk of cheddar. Buy a $199 pass before December 2 at 11:59 pm (PST). The price goes up to $495 at midnight, December 2.

Today, we’re excited to highlight Antaris, a cloud-based satellite software platform dedicated to simplifying satellite design and deployment while reducing cost and time-to-orbit.

Be in the room when Tom Barton, co-founder and CEO at Antaris, and Laura Crabtree, co-founder and CEO at Epsilon3, take the stage for a session called, “Hardware? What’s That? Why Software is the Future of the Space Economy.”  

Launch gets all the press, but satellites and the software behind them are the workhorses of space. Barton and Crabtree — both spirited founder/CEOs — will talk about how SaaS, open source and cloud-based platforms are revolutionizing the satellite industry and accelerating the space economy. They’ll also discuss what it’s like to be first-time founders, what it really takes to put good code into space and share tips for fellow spacepreneurs.

Tom Barton is the co-founder and CEO of Antaris, an early-stage satellite software innovator. Barton and his team created the company in 2021 with a vision to revolutionize Software for Space — including leveraging open APIs and open source to dramatically reduce costs and time-to-orbit for satellites. 

Antaris, widely considered a New Space disruptor for the satellite ecosystem, is backed by Lockheed Martin Ventures, Acequia, Possible Ventures and E2MC. Barton previously served as COO of satellite leader Planet Labs for three years and was a member of the leadership team responsible for putting the largest imaging satellite constellation in history into orbit. 

Barton was also CEO of Diamanti, Rackable Systems and Cygnus Solutions, and he has held senior leadership roles at Red Hat and Lightspeed Venture Partners. He holds both a B.S. and M.B.A. from Stanford University.

Laura Crabtree is the CEO and co-founder of Epsilon3, a software platform for complex engineering, testing and operational procedures. Among the initial members of the operations team for SpaceX’s Dragon spacecraft, Crabtree helped put the U.S. back in the human space-flight business. She wants to continue to revolutionize the space industry, beginning with operational tools.

TC Sessions: Space takes place on December 6 in Los Angeles. Buy a pass for $199, and then join us — and our partners — to learn about the latest space tech, network for opportunities and build a stronger startup to the stars.

Is your company interested in sponsoring or exhibiting at TC Sessions: Space? Contact our sponsorship sales team by filling out this form.

Antaris predicts the future of the space economy at TC Sessions: Space by Lauren Simonds originally published on TechCrunch


from https://ift.tt/XfD9kW5
via Technews
Share:

Adtech antitrust class damages claim filed against Google in UK — seeking up to $16.3BN

Litigation against Google and its parent entity Alphabet being brought in the U.K. on behalf of thousands of digital publishers — seeking up to £13.6 billion (~$16.3 billion) in damages on their behalf for alleged anti-competitive behavior related to Google’s adtech practices — has been filed with the Competition Appeal Tribunal (CAT).

“The claim alleges that Google abused its dominant position in the market for online advertising, earning super-profits for itself at the expense of the tens of thousands of publishers of websites and mobile apps in the UK,” runs a press release accompanying news of today’s filing at the CAT.

The competition class-action style suit, which includes a parallel European Economic Area (EEA) claim in the Netherlands, was announced earlier this fall. That EEA-wide multi-billion Euro claim is expected to be filed in early 2023, per Geradin Partners, one of the law firms involved in the legal action.

City litigation firm Humphries Kerstetter is also acting on the claim — which is being funded by litigation funder, Harbour.

While Claudio Pollack, a former director of the U.K.’s media and comms regulator, Ofcom, is named as heading the claim — as the representative for the class of businesses allegedly damaged by Google’s actions.

The lawsuit will argue that Google has abused its dominance of adtech infrastructure to dictate terms, control pricing and deploy self preferencing that has damaged thousands of businesses that have had little choice but to use its tools if they wish to generate revenue from advertising.

The suit is being brought on behalf of around 130,000 businesses publishing around 1.75 million websites and apps in the U.K. which the litigation claims have been harmed by Google’s anti-competitive practices.

Economic analysis produced to support the claim suggests Google’s practices may have reduced advertising revenues by up to 40% for some companies.

£13.6 billion is an estimate of the total loss to those 130,000 businesses since January 1, 2014 to date.

The claimants can point to enforcement last year by France’s competition watchdog — which found Google had abused a dominant position for ad servers for website publishers and mobile apps and fining it up to €220 million for a variety of self-preferencing abuses and also extracting a series of interoperability commitments.

Google’s adtech stack — and certain other ad-related practices  — remain under investigation by both EU and U.K. competition authorities.

But European web and app publishers evidently aren’t waiting around for further regulatory smackdowns — not least as they’re hoping to force Google to fork over major damages for what the class action style suits alleges are “serious” anti-competitive practices.

In a statement on the suit, Pollack said: “The marketplace for online advertising is sophisticated, technical and highly automated. Advertising is sold in a fraction of a second in a process which is designed to match the product being advertised with the profile of an individual visiting a website. Third party platforms operate on both sides of the marketplace matching supply with demand and — in an ideal world — ensuring the market operates efficiently and effectively. Unfortunately, it is now well established that this market has developed in a way that is primarily serving Google.”

In another statement, Damien Geradin, founding partner of the eponymous law firm, added: “While the value of the claim we are bringing is substantial, we believe the matter is about much more than money. For years Google has been denying companies in the UK and Europe and beyond, including the local press and the publishers of community focused websites, the chance to earn a proper income by way of advertising.

“As well as bringing Google to account the parties who have lost out need proper compensation, something a CAT claim can achieve at no cost to those parties.”

Google was contacted for a response to the development. The company previously dubbed the litigation “speculative and opportunistic”.

In a further statement emailed to TechCrunch today it said:

Google works constructively with publishers across Europe — our advertising tools, and those of our many adtech competitors, help millions of websites and apps fund their content, and enable businesses of all sizes to effectively reach new customers. These services adapt and evolve in partnership with those same publishers.

While Google is keen to dismiss the legal challenge as baseless, the U.K.’s Competition and Markets Authority (CMA) has expressed major concerns about dysfunction in the digital ad market — following a deep dive investigation it kicked off in 2019.

Its final report, published in July 2020, concluded that the market power of Google and Facebook was so great a new regulatory approach (and dedicated oversight body) was needed to address what it summarized as “wide ranging and self reinforcing” concerns.

However the U.K. government has so far failed to bring forward the necessary legislation to enable that reboot — which may be another factor driving antitrust class action litigation.

In the meanwhile, a planned adtech stack migration by Google away from third party cookie-based tracking (aka its Privacy Sandbox proposal) remains under close regulatory supervision by the CMA — which stepped in following fresh objections by publishers concerned the move would further entrench the adtech giant’s market dominance.

Adtech antitrust class damages claim filed against Google in UK — seeking up to $16.3BN by Natasha Lomas originally published on TechCrunch


from https://ift.tt/xmBMuO8
via Technews
Share:

Magic creator Richard Garfield on why he put a paper game on the blockchain

Richard Garfield is a name familiar to many in the tabletop gaming world, most notably as one of the creators of Magic: The Gathering, the most prominent trading card game out there. But Garfield is dipping his toes into the world of digital and in particular blockchain-adjacent games, and TechCrunch took the opportunity to quiz the veteran gamemaker on the pros and cons of this and other new approaches to gaming.

It should be noted at the outset that unlike the dubious profit-focused gameplay of your Axie Infinity and suchlike, Garfield’s new game, technically a “mode” of Blockchain Brawlers, is not focused on speculation but more of an experiment in distribution of a complete card-based game outside traditional publishing methods.

It should probably also be noted that the game platform is full of the usual NFT and monetization chatter, but the core game itself, a 1v1 bluffing style match, is capable of being played with ordinary playing cards or for that matter numbered pieces of paper. I played a few rounds with him that way and it’s actually quite fun and straightforward (I would like to state for the record that I was in a fair way to win but we had to stop early). A follow-up game unrelated to Garfield’s design and which uses more rarity/stat/token-focused mechanics is underway for a separate release in 2023.

TC: Why is introducing blockchains, tokens and things into game design worth it? When you have consumer fears about things like FTX… I know that they’re very different, but why is the why is the asset worth the risk?

Garfield: There’s some benefits of not being tied to paper, and there’s some benefits of not being digital. In the digital space, the opportunity to sell people games which are digital but ownable has some appeal. In particular, when you sort of contrast what’s evolved in other digital spaces, where there’s so much free to play, which has a lot of negative baggage along with whatever positive it brings to the table.

TC: Of course, FTX can crash and that has nothing to do with, you know, a tracking mechanism for ownership of a card or whatever. But in the minds of consumers, they can be conflated. Is that is that just a consumer education thing? Or is that a branding thing?

Garfield: It’s all the above and more. It’s also a designer and a publisher choice. I think there’s some natural caution in this space, because so much of the design has been in an area which I don’t think is healthy for games, which is trying to conflate it with speculation — which I’ve got a lot of experience with, because this was the environment which Magic: The Gathering began in. And it was very poisonous for the gameplay to have people basically buying just to see their money go up. Because it got in the way of the game as a game.

Image Credits: Blockchain Brawlers

A lot of the designers and publishers these days are embracing that and saying, ‘join this game now, make a lot of money.’ That’s not healthy for game design, but is not intrinsically a part of players ownership of digital assets anymore. The negative qualities of free to play, for instance, aren’t intrinsically a part of free to play. It’s just there’s some things that are difficult to avoid, because of the way the revenue model works. And players these days, with digital ownership are, it’s natural for them to conflate that with the speculation bubble, in the same way that a player who engages free to play, it’s always going to be a danger for them to think that’s it’s pay to win, or it’s some sort of hustle. But there is some confusion, and some reasons for that confusion.

TC: At the beginning of Magic, I’m curious what kind of blowback you got at the time regarding both the business model and the unanticipated hoarding of valuable cards, taking them out of play. Was there skepticism that this was a valid gaming model, and a valid business model? And do you think that kind of reaction is also happening now?

A lot of the designers and publishers these days are embracing that and saying, ‘join this game now, make a lot of money.’ That’s not healthy for game design, but is not intrinsically a part of players ownership of digital assets anymore.

Garfield: Yes, there was some skepticism. And, and it actually took a lot of effort to get past that. And it was quite divisive inside Wizards of the Coast itself. The problem was that as the prices went up with speculation, everybody drew comparison to the comic book market or Cabbage Patch Kids or whatever people collected, and got really popular, and then always busted.

I wasn’t very educated in that area when when I began, because I didn’t pay much attention to collectibles. But very quickly, I adopted the idea that this speculation was just awful for gameplay, that there was no upside for the players.

We had to really work to bust that cycle – intentionally overprinted, for example, because we had to make it so that it wasn’t appealing to collect. When we finally managed to do that, there were some people at the company that thought we had sunk the product. And some players did, because they saw the value of their collection go down. But the game just blossomed at that point. And in the end, that’s what it was about: it was a game. It became very clear that the people who were playing the game were doing it because they loved the gameplay, not because of any investment.

TC: Do you think that something similar will have to happen now with digital ownership? How do you prove that model out? Because I know that people will people will be skeptical like, ‘how do I know I’m not gonna get the rug pulled out on me once I invest a couple 100 bucks in this game?’

Garfield: You really have to trust your publisher. When you’re doing a tradable object game, the publisher can always mess it up.

Image Credits: Blockchain Brawlers

On the other hand, people don’t buy Settlers of Catan and worry about whether the publisher is going to screw that by making their game weaker; they’ve got the game, and they can play it. And that is, to me, the potential appeal of digital ownership, that is that people don’t necessarily have to rely on the publisher. They only have to rely on the publisher to be fair when they’re in charge of some ongoing environment.

TC: How do we move forward on that ownership piece to a point where people can say, ‘Hey, I paid my 50 bucks, I have that digital copy.’ People will trust Steam for a PC game. But if it gets more complicated with, you know, NFT based instances of cards and things like that.

Garfield: Well, it’s a matter of, if you’re having your game engine being provided by somebody, you’ve got to trust them. That’s the end of the story. Here you have other avenues. Whether those will evolve or not depends on the community, and you know, whether there’s people who are interested enough to pursue that.

I should point out that, with the game that I’ve worked on here, I was very firmly in the board game category, in the sense that the game that’s been provided is something where there’s no distinction between what players own — it’s a completely fair game. Really, it was the only reason I became interested in the project, because the publisher said they backed me on that.

[Note: Players can own different “moves” and cosmetics but the gameplay elements, essentially the numbers 1-8 and some other minor things, are functionally the same for all even though they are treated as NFTs or some other owned digital item. These items may serve different purposes in other modes or games.]

That part of the game is always there for people, like they can play it themselves, or somebody can code a new framework for it. And it’s simple enough that that’s not hard. This really is a very close to a traditional game, in the sense that you buy a box and you can play.

TC: I feel like my readers are going to ask, well, why am I not just buying this game on Steam? Or what is what is really the improvement over a free to play situation where, you know, if there’s 50 cards, I pay $50. And now I’ve got all the cards. What really are the advantages that you see in this approach versus the traditional publishing or a free to play model?

Garfield: Frankly, I think that the advantages have been overstated by a lot of people. And in fact, that’s what’s kept me out of it for so long is that I really didn’t see the advantage over a server based system for a long time. The key thing which got me involved is just how hard it is to get certain games done in the digital space, because of this free to play expectation.

Like there’s a lot of games that, in theory, yeah, you could just put it on Steam, or put it up on iOS and have people download and play it. But you actually can’t do that, because you can’t charge for it. And if you put it up for free, you got to pay for it. And if you start attaching some free to play monetization to it, you’ve got advertisements or, you know, you got to fill a bar, or do cosmetics, or something which may not be of interest to designers or the players.

The key thing which got me involved is just how hard it is to get certain games done in the digital space, because of this free to play expectation.

So the game that’s being done here, for example, it could be done on Steam, or it could be done on iOS. But the games I’ve done in the past, which are in this description have been really hard to get going because of this, because you’ve got to make it free. And then you’ve got to put in ads or something. So I’m being drawn to it in the same way that I really like working with paper publishers, because I can say: ‘here’s a card game,’ and they can print it, put it in a box, sell it to people. And nobody complains about that as a revenue model.

TC: There’s obviously there’s been this huge renaissance of tabletop gaming. Everybody loves it, everybody’s playing with paper, everybody’s playing with cardboard and wood, and it’s great. But then you also have crossover successes, like Gloomhaven, which has a great digital version and paper version. I’m curious how you think it’ll play out over the next few years as analog and digital gaming both become more popular, and continue to cross pollinate one another.

Garfield: That’s a really exciting area. I could talk for a long time on that. I’ve been really interested in that space. I first began to think about it back in, I guess, the late 90s, where I just was struck by how I liked computer games, I like board games. And then I would play whatever, TF [Team Fortress]. I would play some digital shooter or something like that, and then I would play Scrabble.

And I’d think, how are these even in the same space? They’re just such different experiences, and why aren’t there more games sort of that are like the board games I love, but taking advantage of all the things which have to be offered digitally.

So to see more and more examples of that, including, like, Slay the Spire, these games, which have this sensibility really rooted in traditional gameplay, but taking full advantage of what the computer has to offer, and not making you just play twitch games or something like that… It’s a very exciting area, I’m really excited to see where it goes, and happy to contribute anything to it where I can.

Magic creator Richard Garfield on why he put a paper game on the blockchain by Devin Coldewey originally published on TechCrunch


from https://ift.tt/RInzC1c
via Technews
Share:

AWS adds automated agent monitoring to Amazon Contact Center

AWS introduced Contact Center, its customer service oriented product some years ago, putting it smack dab in the middle of enterprise applications. It also places the company in the position of competing directly with the likes of Salesforce and other established enterprise SaaS vendors.

When you are competing in that space, you need some powerful features, and today at AWS re:invent in Las Vegas, AWS CEO Adam Selipsky introduced three features to help bring more automation to managing Amazon Contact Centers running on AWS.

For starters, the company is introducing new performance management capabilities under Contact Lens for Amazon Connect designed to help managers identify CSAs who are having issues. The solution uses a combination of performance review forms and machine learning-driven voice analytics to review job performance.

In reality, it’s supposed to help identify agents who might need additional training or coaching. “These reduce the time the contact center managers spend identifying performance issues and helping to coach agents,” Selipsky explained today. Employees could see it differently (the bot says I didn’t answer correctly).

Somewhat along the same lines, AWS is also introducing a new capability to guide agents through customer interaction so they can resolve issues faster and in a more consistent manner. This should help reduce the number of mistakes, and the need for the prior feature (at least in theory).

Amazon Contact Center screen for guiding CSA interactions.

Image Credits: AWS

The company also announced the general availability of Amazon Connect forecasting, which was originally announced in March this year. It’s designed to help contact center managers optimize agent schedules and ensure that they have the right people available.

“Connect is a great example of how the cloud is removing constraints to reimagine business challenges like delivering better customer service,” Selipsky said, something that SaaS companies have known all along, but for AWS, which tends to concentrate on infrastructure and platform pieces, it is a different approach.

Read more about AWS re:Invent 2022 on TechCrunch

AWS adds automated agent monitoring to Amazon Contact Center by Ron Miller originally published on TechCrunch


from https://ift.tt/2BiCYGU
via Technews
Share:

AWS gets data clean rooms for analytics data

AWS today launched a new service that will help users inside an advertising or marketing organization share data with other employees inside their company or with outside partners, all without running the risk of inadvertently sharing personal data.

This new service is part of Amazon’s new AWS for Advertising & Marketing initiative, which aims to leverage existing AWS services — and those from its partners — to provide purpose-built services for them. Clean Rooms is the first major new product of this initiative.

“Data clean rooms are protected environments where multiple parties can analyze combined data without ever exposing the raw data have emerged as a solution,” AWS CEO Adam Selipsky explained in today’s keynotes. “The clean rooms are hard to build. Their complex requirements take months to develop and once you’ve built a clean room you have to continuously update the data all the while meeting requests for new collaborators and data types.”

A company that has a customer’s loyalty data, for example, could collaborate with another that has data on a user’s ad-clicking behavior to create new insights into a user’s behavior, all without every sharing that user’s raw and identifiable data, Selipsky argued.

“With these insights, we can produce even more relevant ads while maintaining privacy for everyone to get started,” he said. “Brands and media publishers use the clean room console or the API and they set up a clean room and start collaborating with other companies in just a few clicks. So instead of spending months of development time to customize the types of queries and restrictions, you just need to allow partners to run these clean rooms with you.”

The idea here is to provide a single service that companies can use to collaborate on data while still protecting the underlying data, using a set of configurable controls. All collaborators can contribute their own data, be it in plain text, hashed, or pre-encrypted. Then, they can use these clean rooms to collaborate on this data, all without revealing the raw data to each other.

In total, there can be up to five collaborators and their data is stored in an AWS Glue Data Catalog. When anyone runs a query over this data, Clean Rooms will read it, wherever it lives, and then the service will automatically apply the pre-set rules to protect each participant’s raw data. Each table can have its own rules, which restrict the type of query that is allowed. Encrypted data will remain encrypted when these queries are run.

“Customers in the advertising and marketing industry have been seeking new ways to interoperate with their partners while protecting consumer data and reducing heavy lifting from their engineering teams,” said Tim Barnes, director of solutions for advertising & marketing technology at AWS. “With the launch of AWS Clean Rooms and AWS for Advertising & Marketing, AWS customers now have a broad set of solutions that make it easier for them to securely collaborate together, operate cost-effectively at petabyte scale and millisecond latency, and innovate more quickly in areas like advertising measurement and customer experience.”

Read more about AWS re:Invent 2022 on TechCrunch

AWS gets data clean rooms for analytics data by Frederic Lardinois originally published on TechCrunch


from https://ift.tt/qNV0eEA
via Technews
Share:

Twitter says it’s no longer enforcing COVID-19 misleading information policy

Twitter is no longer enforcing its policy against misleading information about COVID-19, per an update posted to an official company blog page.

Reuters spotted the change earlier — which said the change was effective as of last Wednesday.

“Effective November 23, 2022, Twitter is no longer enforcing the COVID-19 misleading information policy,” the social media company writes in a brief grey-on-grey note on a company webpage that’s still emblazoned with the title: “Coronavirus: Staying safe and informed on Twitter”.

No explanation was given by Twitter for the policy change.

Under its prior COVID-19 misinformation policy the company had said it would remove “demonstrably false or potentially misleading content that has the highest risk of causing harm”.

Twitter coronavirus policy page

Grey on grey update freezing enforcement of Twitter’s COVID-19 misleading information policy (Screengrab: Natasha Lomas/TechCrunch)

Since billionaire Tesla owner, Elon Musk, took over the company last month, on closing his $44BN takeover and drastically slashing headcount, Twitter has stopped responded to press requests — and appears to have entirely shuttered its comms function — leaving Musk’s own tweets or posts like this one to its company blog as the only official outlet for confirming what it’s doing.

While it’s not clear why Twitter has abandoned enforcement of the COVID-19 policy there was plenty of nuance in how it could be interpreted — as well as a range of enforcement actions that might be applied by Twitter, including putting contextual or warning labels on tweets; reducing visibility and blocking sharing; all the way up to requiring removal of the tweet; and, for repeat offenders, suspending accounts.

All that enforcement has presumably now ceased under Musk — who, on taking over Twitter at the end of October, tweeted gleefully that “the bird is freed!”.

Roughly a month later, Musk’s approach to ‘liberating’ speech on the platform means he’s opened the door to conspiracy nonsense peddlers to amplify dangerous bs about COVID-19 on Twitter. So the backsliding is real.

See, for example, this wild claim tweeted last Friday by mega Musk fanboy, Kimdotcom — whose account has some 1.1M followers on Twitter — in which he heavily implies that “vaccines now kill more people than COVID”. His ‘evidence’ for that? A graph of “excess deaths” in Europe whose source, EuroMOMO, does not make any reference to causes of excess deaths.

A report made to Twitter, via its official misinformation reporting channel, of Kimdotcom’s tweet for spreading COVID-19 misinformation did not yield a response from the company last week. And that inaction is now apparently Twitter policy.

At the time of writing it was still possible to file a report via official Twitter channels of COVID-19 misinformation — see the below screengrab for its unamended policy statements — but, again, no action will presumably be taken on any such reports…

Twitter misleading info report

Screengrab: Natasha Lomas/TechCrunch

Per details of the framework the company had previously used for evaluating “potentially misleading” claims related to COVID-19 — to determine whether it would or would not take action on a particular tweet — it said for this type of tweet to qualify as a misleading claim “it must be an assertion of fact (not an opinion), expressed definitively, and intended to influence others’ behavior”.

“Under this policy, we consider claims to be false or misleading if (1) they have been confirmed to be false by subject-matter experts, such as public health authorities; or (2) they include information which is shared in a way that could confuse or deceive people,” it also previously stipulated.

Additionally, Twitter, pre-Musk, conceded that it would be unable to take enforcement action “on every Tweet that contains incomplete or disputed information about COVID-19” — saying it would therefore focus on addressing those claims “that could adversely impact an individual, group, or community”; with its greatest concern stated as being to curb misleading information that could increase the likelihood of exposure to the virus, or which might negatively impact health systems’ capacity to cope, or could lead to discrimination and avoidance of communities and/or places of business based on “perceived affiliation with protected groups”.

Given all that nuance around enforcement it’s not 100% certain Twitter, pre-Musk, would have taken down Kimdotcom’s tweet. But it’s 100% guaranteed it won’t do anything about any nonsense tweets about COVID-19 now with Musk in charge.

It’s not clear why the company would want to step back from enforcing a policy that was intended to help protect public health. But Musk has presented himself as a free speech absolutist and continues to actively seek to stoke culture wars on the platform he now owns.

He also recently said he would let scores of previously banned Twitter accounts return to the platform under a general amnesty — so he’s been tended toward pulling out any stops (though he did apparently draw the line at unbanning InfoWars’ conspiracy hate preacher, Alex Jones, implying distaste about lies he’d spread about massacred school children).

What Musk’s (near) free-for-all for disinformation will mean for Twitter users is a continued degradation of the quality of the information they’re being exposed to on the platform.

(See also: His disastrous paid verification scheme — which does not distinguish between people who’ve paid for a ‘Blue Check’ and accounts that got one under the prior actual identity-verification scheme, unless you click through to read some tiny, grey print.)

This free pass for disinformation seems likely to result in Twitter losing more users as more people decide they’ve had enough of being exposed to nonsense and take flight, seeking less toxic online spaces to socialize.

Advertisers are also unlikely to relish their brands being served up alongside misleading tweets about COVID-19.

Another looming question for Musk-Twitter is how regulators will respond to the amped up disinformation risk.

As we’ve written before, under its prior leadership Twitter had signed itself up to a series of voluntary commitments to fight the spread of disinformation on its platform in the European Union. As far as we’re aware, the company has not revoked its status as a signatory to this EU Code of Practice on Disinformation. But its participation in the initiative appears to only exist purely on paper now.

We’ve reached out to the European Commission for a response to Twitter’s policy change on misleading information about COVID-19  and will update this report with any response.

While the EU Code is not legally binding, and breaching it does not imply any sanctions, the Commission — whose initiative this is — is about to take on a major oversight role for large platforms under the incoming Digital Services Act (DSA). It has previously said adherence to the disinformation Code will be factored into its assessment of platforms’ compliance with the legally binding requirements of the DSA. And breaching that regime could incur penalties of up to 6% of global turnover. 

Twitter says it’s no longer enforcing COVID-19 misleading information policy by Natasha Lomas originally published on TechCrunch


from https://ift.tt/D0bxgwW
via Technews
Share:

Snapchat complies with the California Privacy Rights Act with a new toggle switch for users

Snapchat is adding a new privacy setting that enables users based in California to better protect their sensitive personal information. The company confirmed it’s rolling out a feature designed to comply with the California Privacy Rights Act (CPRA), which takes effect on Jan. 1, 2023, and applies to personal data collected on or after Jan. 1, 2022.

In November 2020, California residents voted to pass the CPRA, also known as Proposition 24, which builds on an earlier consumer privacy law, the California Consumer Privacy Act (CCPA) of 2018.

While the CCPA  gave residents the right to access and delete personal information held by businesses and opt out of the sale of that data, the new law puts into place further requirements for businesses around their data collection practices and data retention. It additionally introduces new notification requirements and clarifies that users have the right to opt out of both the sharing and the sale of their personal information, while also adding a new category of “sensitive data.”

The law created the California Privacy Protection Agency to enforce the state’s privacy laws, as well as investigate violations, and assess penalties if warranted.

Consumers based in California, meanwhile, are to gain the right to not only know who’s collecting their information, but also be able to access it, correct it, delete it and transfer it, and to stop its sale and sharing, without being penalized as a result. As part of this, they’re also to gain the ability to access their options through “easily accessible” self-serve tools.

Snapchat’s implementation would seemingly address the latter as it presents a simple toggle switch under its Privacy Controls section in the app’s Settings screen. Here, users will be presented with a new option at the bottom of the list that reads “California Privacy Choices.”

A tap into this screen, (as spotted by competitive intelligence provider Watchful — see below image) reveals a new option to “Limit the Use of Sensitive Personal Information.” This page explains that enabling the setting would require Snapchat to limit the use of users’ personal info, including things like precise geolocation.

Image Credits: Watchful

The setting, however, is appearing in the Snapchat app for all U.S. users — even those who don’t live in the state.

Snapchat confirmed the new privacy feature is rolling out in compliance with the CPRA, but notes it only functions for those users in California.

The addition is interesting as it demonstrates how a popular mobile app has chosen to comply with the new legislation. And unlike on Facebook — where settings are buried, difficult to find, and constantly being relocated — Snapchat’s new privacy feature is relatively easy to find. All of the app’s settings are available from one main screen, organized into sections. So the new CPRA-compliant setting isn’t something users have to dig around to find.

Snapchat complies with the California Privacy Rights Act with a new toggle switch for users by Sarah Perez originally published on TechCrunch


from https://ift.tt/at3ZorU
via Technews
Share:

Flickr weighs support for ActivityPub, the social protocol powering Twitter alternative Mastodon

On the heels of Tumblr’s decision to integrate with ActivityPub — the social protocol powering the open-source Twitter alternative Mastodon and others — it appears that photo-sharing site Flickr is now considering doing the same. Flickr CEO Don MacAskill today began to actively poll users about whether or not they’d like to see Flickr support the protocol, too. If it moved forward with this plan, Flickr would be the latest larger company to commit to joining the “fediverse” — the interconnected group of independent servers across the globe running free, open-source software that allows their users to communicate and connect with one another.

The concept presents a challenge to modern-day social networks controlled by corporations — or billionaires like Elon Musk.

ActivityPub is a key component to the fediverse, powering not only Mastodon, whose popularity has grown in the wake of Musk’s Twitter acquisition, but also other alternative social platforms including the Instagram-like Pixelfed, video streaming service PeerTube, and others. If Flickr were to add support for ActivityPub, it would no longer function only as a photo-sharing site, but would become a part of a larger web of social networks where users could find, follow and engage with one another across platforms without having to create separate accounts for each service they choose to use.

MacAskill had already been weighing Flickr’s direction with regard to the fediverse before today. Last week, following the Tumblr announcement, the Flickr CEO had tweeted that his company had been internally discussing ActivityPub support, too.

“It might be right up our alley,” MacAskill said at the time.

But in a later tweet, he cautioned that taking this path would mean having to deprioritize other projects on Flickr’s roadmap — including those customers said they wanted. That’s why it makes sense that the exec would try to gauge consumer demand for the protocol’s adoption before actually making a commitment.

MacAskill today noted that there “appears to be a lot of interest” in seeing Flickr move forward with ActivityPub, but he wanted to first gauge the type of interest more specifically.

So far, the results of a poll he published on Twitter seem to be promising. As of the time of writing, only 8.9% of respondents have said “no” to the idea of ActivityPub integration.

38.2% said yes, but only if it was free. Meanwhile, two other groups indicated that ActivityPub support could become something that encouraged them to pay for Flickr, as 37.4% said yes, and said they already pay for Flickr, while 15.4% said yes, and said they might pay for Flickr if the protocol was supported.

MacAskill ran the same poll on Mastodon, where the interest towards making the support a part of a free product is so far running even higher, at 47%. 26% and 22% said yes and they even already pay for Flickr or would consider doing so if ActivityPub was added, respectively.

Though an older site, Flickr today claims it’s used by more than 60 million people per month, according to its Jobs listings page. That would bring a significant number of new people to the fediverse, if the company chooses to add support for ActivityPub.

Flickr, of course, could use a feature that encouraged more customer engagement and adoption. Once a prominent company in the Web 2.0 era, Flickr eventually lost out to other social photo-sharing platforms, like Facebook and Instagram, as well as to more utilitarian photo-hosting services, like Google Photos and iCloud.

In April 2018, Flickr sold to SmugMug and soon the company reduced the limits for free usage, began threatening to delete photos from non-paying users, and urged users to help it find more paying subscribers to keep it afloat. Earlier this year, Flickr also began paywalling the ability to upload NSFW photos to its site.

In more recent days, MacAskill has claimed Flickr is “healthy and growing again,” and noted it has established a non-profit to preserve its images in the event that the company again falls on hard times. Flickr didn’t immediately respond to a request for comment on its ActivityPub plans, but a representative later noted MacAskill is a “wildly customer-centric leader and technologist with a long track record of successfully identifying meaningful innovations,” and, “This is potentially one of those innovations, which is why he’s exploring it publicly,” they said.

 

updated, 11/28/22, 5:19 pm with flickr comments

Flickr weighs support for ActivityPub, the social protocol powering Twitter alternative Mastodon by Sarah Perez originally published on TechCrunch


from https://ift.tt/Ao2nl98
via Technews
Share:

Move over, operators — consultants are the new nontraditional VC

Operating experience has become a buzzword over the last few years as venture capitalists pump up their resumes in a quest to set themselves apart from other sources of startup capital. Now, it seems that we are seeing the next evolution of that trend.

This year has seen a wave of startup consultant firms looking to raise venture funds of their own to take stakes in companies they are already working with or that align with their practice. In theory, this makes total sense because both consultants and venture capitalists have the same goal at the end of the day: helping companies grow.

“Most come on board because we provide the capital, plus. What is that plus? The plus with us is storytelling.” FNDR CEO James Vincent

But why are so many consultant-led venture capital funds launching now? It’s a particularly rough time in the broader venture market, and economy in general, in addition to being one of the toughest periods for emerging managers and first-time fundraisers. It’s worth noting that all of these funds are raising outside capital as opposed to investing off their balance sheets.

For one thing, the startups they were already working with were asking them to.

Move over, operators — consultants are the new nontraditional VC by Rebecca Szkutak originally published on TechCrunch


from https://ift.tt/2fhQ61L
via Technews
Share:

On affinity-focused fintechs, the future of BNPL, and more

Of all the venture capital funding invested in 2021, around one in every five dollars went to fintech. But this boom now seems behind us, as global fintech funding activity returned to pre-2021 levels.

Worse, fintech didn’t escape the recent waves of tech layoffs, with high-profile companies like Brex, Chime and Stripe making headlines for this disheartening reason over the last few weeks.

And yet, fintech startups are still getting founded and funded this year. Of the 223 companies in Y Combinator’s summer 2022 batch, 79 fell more or less into the fintech category.

Why are founders and investors still placing bets in fintech, and where? To find out more, we reached out to fintech-focused VC firm Fiat Ventures.

Fiat co-founders Alex Harris, Drew Glover, and Marcos Fernandez also run its sister arm, Fiat Growth, a growth consultancy working with fintech and insurtech clients. This enables them to comment not only on sector trends from an investor perspective, but also to share practical advice.

One of their key recommendations is for fintech startups to lean into customer acquisition channels whose cost is less variable or seasonal than others, but our exchange covered a wider range of topics, from financial inclusion to offline channels and more. Read on:

Editor’s note: This interview has been edited for length and clarity. Many of the linked companies are portfolio companies of Fiat Ventures or clients of Fiat Growth.

TC: What makes you say that “fintech acquisition funnels are too complicated”?

Alex Harris: Fintech products by nature have complicated acquisition funnels and enrollment flows. Some complications are unavoidable in a highly regulated environment, but superfluous complications can arise when rigorous testing is not applied and funnels include unnecessary bloat.

Even the smallest detail can generate friction. For example, in the know-your-customer (KYC) process, many fintechs will ask a customer for their entire Social Security Number. In most cases, for non-credit products, only the last four digits of the SSN are needed for identification purposes. While only a five-digit difference, this can have a meaningful impact on conversion rates that can save large sums of money at scale.

Data is certainly king, but there is a time and place for data collection and personalization. Too often, a well-intentioned data team will ask personalization and demographics questions directly in an enrollment process. However, these questions can most often come in a post-enrollment survey or periodically throughout the lifecycle of a customer. Even post-enrollment, these questions need to be thought out. We regularly see data collected for the sake of collecting it, without actionable insights derived from them.

On affinity-focused fintechs, the future of BNPL, and more by Anna Heim originally published on TechCrunch


from https://ift.tt/ZsVjrcf
via Technews
Share:

Popular Post

Search This Blog

Powered by Blogger.

Labels

Labels

Most view post

Facebook Page

Recent Posts

Blog Archive