The $99 Nokia 2 will receive Android 8.1 update with Android Go tweaks
HMD Global is taking the best bits of Android Go and integrating them in the Nokia 2.
HMD Global has done a fantastic job when it comes to updating its phones, and the company is now extending that commitment to the $99 Nokia 2. Replying to a user’s query on Twitter, HMD Global’s Chief Product Officer Juho Sarvikas has mentioned that the Nokia 2 will pick up the Android 8.1 Oreo update.
With Android Go now official, Nokia 2 owners were wondering whether the device would make the switch to the lightweight version of the OS. Sarvikas has allayed those doubts by stating that the device will continue to be on the standard version while incorporating Android Go’s memory management tweaks.
Hi! It will receive Android Oreo. 1GB RAM devices will be supported on 8.1 release where many of the Android Go memory management improvements will be integrated. Nokia 2 performance will only get better over time!
— Juho Sarvikas (@sarvikas) December 28, 2017
HMD is known to optimize the software to make optimal use of the hardware — a point it stressed on during the launch of the Nokia 2. The Android Go optimizations should go a long way in making the phone — which has just 1GB of RAM — smoother when it comes to day-to-day usage.
The rest of the specs won’t set your heart aflutter either, with the phone featuring a 5-inch 720p display, Qualcomm 212 chipset, 8GB of storage, microSD slot, and LTE connectivity. The cornerstone of the Nokia 2 is a 4100mAh battery that delivers two days of battery life even with heavy usage. Not bad considering it costs just $99 unlocked.
There’s no timeline for when the Nokia 2 will pick up the Android 8.1 update, but we’ll let you know once we hear more.
Do you prefer curved or flat smartphone displays?
Looks versus function.
If you look at devices like the Galaxy S8, LG V30, and Google Pixel 2 XL, you’ll see that they have one thing in common – they’ve all got curved displays.
Curved displays on smartphones are something that’s become more and more commonplace with each passing year, and while there’s no denying that this is an aesthetically pleasing trend, it’s not the most practical.
Some of our forum users recently got into a discussion about whether or not curved screens are actually worth it, and this is what they had to say:
pool_shark
12-28-2017 07:38 AM“
The curved screens are overrated in my opinion, I’d rather have a flat screen, but I have 3 different kinds of cases and 3 different kinds of screen protectors.
None of my cases nor screen protectors cost more than $20 individually.
I’m only on my 2nd screen protector since September and that is due to changing cases.Reply
Tim1954
12-28-2017 09:04 AM“
Not fussed on these curved screens either, my fingers overlap when I’m lying down (thus need better grip) and annoy the crap out me… Might try the active line in future they have flat screens with bevels I believe…
Reply
rsgoldens
12-28-2017 11:36 AM“
I’m with you. Had a decent glass screen protector on for a while, but it came off. Then I went without for two days and had micro scratches. I like my screen to stay nice, scratches annoy me but I also don’t like the non glass protectors. I just sold the phone. Might come back when the curves go away. Did the same thing with the S8+.
Reply
bhatech
12-28-2017 12:46 PM“
Personally I don’t like curved screens and prefer flat screen as well but I haven’t used screen protectors on any of my devices for years now and couldn’t be more happier. I just love the feel of the glass without any additional layers on the screen.
As far as for case I don’t understand, there are many cases for the note 8 with raised lips and good protection. Not sure what kind of case are you…Reply
As always, we’d now like to hear from you – Are you a fan of curved screens on phones?
Join the conversation in the forums!
Start streaming: How to store your existing media in the cloud
Buying DVDs and CDs made a lot of sense a decade ago. What do you do with them now?
Years ago, the thought of watching movies on a phone was absurd — our connections were too slow, or they took up too much space. Today, if we still buy movies, many of us are choosing to eschew physical media for digital copies that can be watched anywhere effortlessly.
But what do we do with all those DVDs in our living rooms? Well, we can’t digitize quite everything, but there are several ways to bring your library into the cloud for your viewing convenience.
Content
When it comes to getting your media into the clouds, your options are somewhat limited by the type of content you’re hoping to digitize. Music is easily digitized as ripping CDs is a simple and largely unrestricted process, and there are some music services that will let you upload to their cloud and mix your library with their streaming library for the best of both worlds (though they’re quickly disappearing).
Digitizing movies is a bit more complicated or a bit more expensive depending on the route you take. You can either pay to convert your movies to certain digital libraries or you can use specialized software to rip your DVDs and Blu-rays to a digital file that can be stored in the cloud and streamed.
If you don’t want to hassle with uploading what you already have, you can still enjoy most of your movies on one streaming library or another. To see which streaming subscriptions are right for you, check out our holiday streaming guide.
Google Play Music Manager
Say what you will about how badly Google Play Music needs an overhaul — and I have said plenty — but Google currently has just about the best free streaming music locker service on the market right now.
Regardless of whether you subscribe to Google Play Music All Access, Google Play Music allows all users to upload 50,000 songs to their Play Music library (100,000 if you’re a Samsung Galaxy S8 owner) and stream them for free across most mobile and desktop platforms, as well as Chromecast and Android TV. You can upload songs through a Chrome extension, but this is rather tedious as opposed to using Google Play Music Manager, which will upload your music in the background on your Windows PC while you go about your day.
This isn’t without strings. You can have 10 devices authorized for Play Music, only 5 of which can be phones. Normally, this wouldn’t be a big deal, except that you can only deauthorize 4 devices per year, meaning if you device-hop a lot, you could get locked out of your own library.
Google Drive
If you’d rather have your music in a cloud that you can access outside a dedicated app and already have your music organized in folders the way you like, there is another option you might want to consider: Google Drive. Granted, Google Drive only gives you 15 GB for free, but you can fit a lot of music in 15 GB, and you can use Google Drive for far more than just music, such as your documents and movies.
Once you upload your music to Google Drive, you can stream it using a number of Android music players that can stream your music directly from Google Drive, like CloudPlayer by doubleTwist.
Plex
For a more robust streaming service for your personal media cloud, there’s also Plex, which allows you to turn one computer into a personal media server for the rest of your devices. Plex can stream music and movies that you have owned and ripped yourself. If you’ve ripped all your DVD’s and Blu-rays already, Plex will help you organize and stream them to all your other devices, for a small subscription.
Read more: Getting started with Plex
Vudu Disc to Digital
Have a Blockbusters’ worth of DVDs you want to put into the cloud, but don’t want to hassle with ripping them all yourself? Well, Vudu will allow you to convert them into digital copies on their digital cloud — and movies from Movies Anywhere-eligible studios can then travel from your Vudu library to Amazon or Google Play for your easier viewing pleasure.
You can either use Vudu’s Android app to scan the UPCs of DVDs you still have in the box. If you have DVDs that were shifted to a multi-disc binder for easier storage or lost the box somewhere, never fear! You can still convert your DVD’s using a desktop computer with a DVD drive and the Vudu To Go app. The Android app is a bit more finicky than its desktop counterpart, but the desktop app is also a bit slower since you have to insert every single disc you want to convert.
It costs $2 to upgrade a DVD to an SD copy or a Blu-ray to an HDX copy. To upgrade a DVD to an HDX copy is $5, which is still far cheaper than going out and buying a new Blu-ray. Not every DVD is eligible for the program, as studios have to agree to the service, but outside Disney, most mainstream movies are eligible.
Hardware
For streaming your newly-digitized content, we have a plethora of options, but they can be broken down into two types: dongles and set-top boxes. Dongles aren’t as cumbersome to set up and can often hide behind your TV, but they don’t have as robust a UI, and often lack a dedicated remote. Set-top boxes are more expensive and take up more space, but they also can have greater capacity, greater cloud service support, they all come with dedicated remotes.
Many Blu-ray players and Smart TVs come with support for the major digital platforms these days, so check and see what services the tech you already own supports before you go out and buy something new.
Chromecast Ultra
If you just want to start playing digital content on your TV without dealing with a whole new set-top box with a new remote and interface, then the $69 Chromecast Ultra is for you. The hardware side couldn’t be simpler: stick one end into the HDMI port on your TV, stick a power cable into the other end, stick the power cable into the wall. Once plugged up, you use the Google Home app for your Android or iOS phone or through Google Chrome to connect it to the internet and give it a name you’ll see when sending content to it.
To send the media to your TV through the Google Cast protocol, you open a media service on your phone or in Google Chrome and “cast” it to the Chromecast receiver using the cast button in the app. Your stream will start playing on your TV, and you’re free to do other things on your phone or in Chrome while it plays.
See at Google
Amazon Fire TV
If you’re an Amazon Prime user and buy your digital movies from their store, you’re probably going to want to use their Fire TV for streaming. The $70 Amazon Fire TV, like the Chromecast, is an HDMI dongle. It comes with a remote control, supports 4K, and has access to pretty much everything except Apple content, though apps on the FireOS have been a bit slower than the more robust Android TV or Apple TV systems.
Amazon and Google have fought for years when it comes to streaming and streaming devices, so that does mean you’ll have to find something else if you’re a Google Play Music or a big Google Play Movies user.
See at Amazon
Roku Ultra
Roku was the first big name in streaming set-top boxes and it remains one of the most popular and well-supported streaming boxes today. Roku supports just about every streaming service that isn’t Apple — though to be fair, no set-top box supports Apple’s video streaming services except Apple TV. Roku has years more experience in the streaming market, and it shows, as their devices and their remotes continue to refine and refine while most other set-top boxes are still figuring out what works and what doesn’t.
If you’re going to buy one, you might as well spring for the $89 Roku Ultra. It features 4K support but no Dolby Atmos or Dolby Vision support.
See at Amazon
NVIDIA Shield TV
Android TV is a step up in the living room from Google’s Chromecast standard: it’s Android designed for the big screen and designed to be used with simple remotes or game controllers.
The $200 NVIDIA Shield TV is the best Android TV box you can buy. It’s also the most expensive, but NVIDIA has cut the price of the Shield TV frequently and generously this Christmas season. It features a beautifully simple UI, native support for most mainstream media services, 4K support and some pretty great gaming since it’s an NVIDIA powerhouse in a sleek black-and-green box.
If I had to make one recommendation with the Shield TV, it’s this: get the controller. Lots of scrolling and fast-forwarding is far easier with the controller than it is with the remote.
See at Amazon
Android 8.0 Oreo rolling out to Moto Z2 Force on T-Mobile
And then there were two.
Just about a week ago, Verizon became the first carrier to roll out Android 8.0 Oreo to the Moto Z2 Force. We suspected that other carriers would soon follow in Big Red’s footsteps, and now T-Mobile has done just that by pushing out the update to its version of the phone as well.
The software experience on the Z2 Force was already one of its most redeeming qualities, and the bump to Oreo only helps to improve it. Picture-in-picture is extremely useful, the ability to snooze individual notifications is a godsend, and the overall better performance/battery life is something we don’t expect anyone will have an issue with.
T-Mobile appears to have started sending out the Oreo update late last night, so if it hasn’t hit your Z2 Force just yet, keep an eye out for it over the next couple of days.
AT&T and Sprint – the ball is in your court.
Android Oreo
- Android Oreo review!
- Everything new in Android Oreo
- How to get Android Oreo on your Pixel or Nexus
- Oreo will make you love notifications again
- Will my phone get Android Oreo?
- Join the Discussion
Samsung and LG also claim to not slow down phones with older batteries
“Never have, never will!”
Whether or not you own an iPhone, chances are you’ve heard a thing or two about Apple throttling CPU performance of older handsets as their batteries age. Although Apple has since responded to the outrage around this, there are still plenty of people that aren’t at all happy with the way the whole situation was handled.
Motorola and HTC recently issued statements of their own stating that neither one follows similar practices to what Apple’s doing, and now we have official responses from Samsung and LG, too.
Speaking to PhoneArena, LG said:
Never have, never will! We care what our customers think.
Samsung also doesn’t throttle CPU performance with older batteries, but its answer was much longer:
Product quality has been and will always be Samsung Mobile’s top priority. We ensure extended battery life of Samsung mobile devices through multi-layer safety measures, which include software algorithms that govern the battery charging current and charging duration. We do not reduce CPU performance through software updates over the lifecycles of the phone.
With Android OEMs now speaking out about this, are you more inclined to purchase a Motorola, HTC, LG, or Samsung phone down the road as opposed to something else?
Unlike Apple, Motorola and HTC don’t slow CPU speed as batteries age
Essential Phone review, four months later: The sun is setting on this experiment
Again, how long do we wait for Essential to figure this out?
With big money and big names involved, Essential was a deserved recipient of intrigue when it launched as a company with the promise of a great Android phone (and so much more). Weeks later, I wrote my original review of the Essential Phone in mid-August, and followed it up after a couple software updates with a definitive review on August 28. Even then, it clearly wasn’t a finished product; beta, at best. Dozens of reviews and weak sales numbers reflected that. Weeks later, I was already asking how much longer we would wait for Essential to “figure it out” with updates and accessories to make it a serious player without a series of caveats.
And now, at the end of December, over four months after my first review, some of the parameters have thankfully changed. Like a permanent $200 price drop to just $499, a couple dozen notable software upgrades, and the release of its 360-degree camera attachment. But even though the enthusiast perspective of the Essential Phone has improved over time as people have seen a mountain of software updates released, I somehow still have most of the same questions and head-shaking moments using it today as I did four months earlier.
The question still stands, though, as to whether the Essential Phone, with a large price cut and notable software improvements, is now good enough to warrant looking at it in ways that it so clearly wasn’t at launch. I’m here to let you know.
See at Amazon
Hardware is the saving grace
Essential Phone What I still love
The one (big) part of the Essential Phone that has aged well, but to be honest didn’t really need any improvement in the first place, is the design and execution of the hardware. The ceramic back isn’t completely impervious to scratches, but it sure is durable. And when it’s perfectly mated to a titanium frame like this, you get a heft in your hand like something that’s truly expensive and finely crafted. All of the flat planes and tightly cut edges are pristine on the same level as any high-end phone out there, but the Essential Phone still manages to be friendly to hold thanks to its strategically curved edges and relatively small dimensions for a modern phone.
This is an excellent design at any price, and it’s executed perfectly.
And that brings us to one of the Essential Phone’s key features, the display. Or, rather, the size and shape of the display and its bezels. This was “the notch” people talked about before Apple released the iPhone X, and it enables the Essential Phone to have a surprisingly large 5.7-inch display that’s comfortable to use in one hand. Aside from some occasional app quirks with a taller-than-usual status bar that covers the notch, I don’t notice that front-facing camera at all. I never feel like it’s in the way or hindering my ability to see things, particularly as that area just blacks out when viewing full-screen video. It’s extremely well handled.
Design and quality-wise, this is a ridiculous value for $499. It feels every bit a phone that used to be $699, and can easily go toe-to-toe with the rest of the flagship market in terms of raw quality and feel. Sure there are a couple odd quirks like the lack of a headphone jack, lack of waterproofing and an oddly rattly vibration motor, but the overall execution of the hardware aside from these little details is immaculate. Of course, it can easily be argued that those details do matter, but that’s a different discussion altogether.
We can’t forget the packed spec sheet, and battery life is good despite the average-sized capacity.
Along the same lines, Essential has a seriously spec-packed phone for this new lower price. It has everything inside it needs to perform well, basically matching the specs Google has in the Pixel 2. As I’ll get to below, Essential simply doesn’t execute with those tools — except in one area, which is battery life. 3040mAh definitely gets the job done with the Essential Phone, leaving me with power in the tank at the end of the day. Aside from a day where bad cell signal really destroyed the battery, I can’t recall a time when the Essential Phone called it quits before I expected it to.
Since we’re following a theme of great ideas that have poor executions, let me also mention that I seriously appreciate Essential’s approach to software. It’s bare-bones out of the box, and I like it that way! A simple interface, a lock screen that works well, no unnecessary bundled apps and very few unnecessary visual changes. Sure I wish Essential could work up a better ambient display, and the camera app is still a disaster (again, more below) but in general this is a fantastic way to do software when you’re a small company that doesn’t have the people or time to spend a ton of customization that in the end actually offers little value.
Software struggles
Essential Phone What I don’t like
Aside from the hardware, every other aspect of my Essential Phone experience has been about frustration. Mostly, it boils down to horrendous software stability and performance. Despite dozens of updates and the anecdotes you may have seen that indicate performance issues have been “fixed,” it most certainly hasn’t. The Essential Phone is handily outperformed by a Moto G5, and that’s just unacceptable — at $699, for sure, but at $499 as well.
Four or five years ago, Android phones were slow and unstable like this. But not today.
It all starts with just general app instability. Apps crash — a lot. More than I’ve experienced on any other phone. They freeze, stutter, lock up and force close. Sometimes you tap an app to open it, and nothing happens for multiple seconds. When an app calls up another one through a share action, it takes the same egregious delay. Sometimes apps open and switch just fine, but then randomly slow down to a crawl with inordinately long splash screens or loading animations. And it isn’t tied to just one app, it’s all apps.
The app issues seem to come as a result of general system instability that I haven’t seen in a high-end phone in years. Touch response is very slow, making everything simply feel sluggish as you tap and scroll around every day. The phone will often struggle to open or close the camera and can fail to save photos if you close the camera too quickly. I’ve had the entire phone go unresponsive for several minutes and require a force reboot (hold the power button for ~15 seconds) multiple times.
Let’s expand on that camera point. Because Essential does deserve some praise for dramatically improving both the performance of the camera app and the overall quality of its photo output since I first looked at the phone. But you have to understand just how downright horrible the camera was at the start … there was nowhere to go but up. Still, a few months and several updates later I’m actually able to take some good photos with the Essential Phone, and that’s great to see. Here are some examples of what it’s capable of:
Camera quality has come a long way, but it still isn’t great and the app is a train wreck.
Those are some good photos. Not fantastic or industry-leading, but good. But what you didn’t see is the frustration and piles of bad shots required to get that handful of good ones. The camera app is slow and unstable and lacks basic features like viewfinder grid lines or any sort of customization or “pro” mode. HDR mode doesn’t really seem to do anything but take photos slower, and toggling it on still inexplicably turns the flash to “auto” mode. The slow performance directly contributes to missing shots, and the fundamentals of a small sensor with no OIS mean you get grainy and blurry low-light shots regularly. The Essential Phone’s camera is still so far from the competition.
Am I nitpicking on this performance and stability point? A little bit, but it’s for good reason. Essential has a phone here that was originally on sale for $699. Even though the price has dropped, it still has an extremely capable set of internal specs. It has set high expectations for this phone to be a great, clean, smooth Android experience. And it isn’t. Not in any way. And in a world where you can get a OnePlus 5T for the same price — not to mention a Motorola phone for $200 — that runs circles around it with better software, you have a problem. Four or five years ago, Android phones were slow and unstable like this. But not today.
The sun is setting
Essential Phone Four months later
Months of hefty software updates have clearly improved the daily experience of using the Essential Phone. What used to be a phone that was near-impossible to consistently use is now one that’s just … mildly frustrating. And it’s mildly frustrating at a lower price, which always helps. At the same time, its hardware stands up incredibly well against its new, cheaper competition — that ceramic and titanium body is perfectly crafted, unique and striking to hold. The internal specs are great for the end of 2017, it’s very compact for its screen size and battery life is good.
It used to be a phone that was near-impossible to use but is now just … mildly frustrating.
The fundamentals are all there. Truth be told, they were there from Day 1. But four months after I first reviewed the Essential Phone, there remains a severe lack of execution. You just can’t get away with selling a high-end phone of any sort that has performance this bad, stability this unpredictable and core functionality that’s just downright broken. It’s exemplified by the camera, but apparent throughout the software experience that Essential is just behind the curve. The company has taken big strides in just the last couple of months, and behind the scenes has surely learned lots of lessons about optimizing an operating system. But as it turns out, this software is really hard to get right. Just as I wrote in my initial review, Essential still seems like it’s one big step away.
I would love to see Essential persevere and actually release another phone next year as a follow-up to the original. Despite the Essential Phone clearly not being finished or refined to the point where it can truly compete, even at $499, I think it’s time to go into maintenance mode with this device and move on to making sure the next one is truly great from the start. The sun is rapidly setting on the Essential Phone launch to the point where no amount of updates or good press can make this phone appealing or sell in the numbers required to make it a success. That window has closed, and it’s time to build up to the next launch — hopefully with software, camera performance and an ecosystem that’s worthy of the hype bestowed on the original.
See at Amazon
China’s Shenzhen city electrifies all 16,359 of its public buses
If you ever see anyone crowing about how nobody’s taking the initiative on sustainable transport, point them in the direction of Shenzhen. The Chinese city has announced that it has successfully electrified its entire fleet of public buses, all 16,359 of them. In addition, more than half of Shenzhen’s fabs now run on electricity, and the plan is to get rid of the remaining gas-powered rides by 2020.
Of course, it’s not as simple as just dumping more than 16,000 diesel-powered buses in a lake and hoping for the best. There was also the matter of building out 510 charging stations and an additional 8,000 charging poles across the city. According to EyeShenzhen, these poles can re-juice a bus from dry in two hours, serving up to 300 vehicles each day.
As much as this is good for the environment more generally, there are already some more tangible benefits for local authorities. China is notorious for its smog problems, but the fleet of electric buses serves to avoid releasing around 1.35 million tons of CO2 into the local atmosphere each year. Then there’s the fact that the city is much quieter now, because the buses themselves aren’t as noisy.
And then there’s the overall cost savings, since the vehicles use nearly 75 percent less energy than their fossil-fuel powered equivalents. Yes, it took around $490 million in subsidy to get the program started, but that’s a small price to pay for cleaner air, quieter cities and a huge boost to the renewables world.
Source: EyeShenzhen
Facebook, Twitter and social media’s road to federal regulation
The extent of Russia’s meddling in the 2016 US presidential election remains unclear, but it’s no secret that social media played a major role. This year brought with it a great deal of scrutiny for tech giants, particularly Facebook, Twitter and Google. These three companies came under the US government’s microscope after news that Kremlin bots and trolls, spearheaded by a group known as the Internet Research Agency, used their sites to tamper with the 2016 presidential election. They spread misinformation (fake news!) and dubious ads across Facebook, Twitter and Google to hundreds of millions of users in the US, with the aim of fomenting hostility among Americans. And it’s safe to say they succeeded.
In October, Facebook revealed to Congress that more than 145 million Americans were exposed to Russian-linked pages and ads in the lead-up to the election — a revelation that laid bare the scope of the Kremlin’s misinformation campaign. That, as it turns out, was actually more damaging than originally disclosed: Facebook first said that 10 million people had seen these types of ads. Twitter discovered more than 2,500 accounts linked to the Internet Research Agency, while Google found Russian-bought ads on its most popular platforms, including Gmail and YouTube.
Facebook, Twitter and Google representatives testifying on Capitol Hill.
As a result, Facebook, Twitter and Google were summoned to testify before the House Judiciary Committee and Senate Intelligence Committee this fall. Members of Congress sought answers about the extent of Russia’s influence during the 2016 presidential election and the role technology played in it, particularly social media platforms. During the hearings, lawyers for Facebook, Twitter and Google were asked by members of the Intelligence Committee about their failure to control Russian bots and trolls from spreading misinformation.
The main point of concern for the committee was the number of deceptive political ads that people potentially saw, including one of Aziz Ansari holding a sign that suggested that you could vote from home using a hashtag. That advertisement as well as thousands of others that hit Facebook and Twitter were targeted at Hillary Clinton supporters.
The plan, it seems, is to trust more actual humans to filter malicious content rather than the algorithms that have already failed us.
Facebook General Counsel Colin Stretch testified that the company is deeply concerned about these threats and is already doubling its engineering efforts to crack down on these “bad actors” going forward. He said Facebook is hiring more ad reviewers and requiring more information from political advertisers, including proof that they’re affiliated with a campaign.
Twitter and Google echoed Stretch’s statements: They both told the Intelligence Committee that they’re working to ensure that the events of 2016 don’t repeat themselves in future elections. The plan, it seems, is to trust more actual humans to filter malicious content rather than the algorithms that have already failed us. Sean Edgett, Twitter’s acting general counsel, said the company is “sharpening its tools” and plans to be more transparent with users and the government in the future. Meanwhile, Google’s Richard Salgado, director of law enforcement and information security, said the company is working on systems that can better detect fake news and fake accounts across its ecosystem.
Still, despite promises from tech companies that these issues are being addressed, recent events raise an urgent question: Should the government start regulating political ads and speech on Facebook, Twitter and Google? There are lawmakers on both sides of the aisle who believe so. Indeed, there’s already legislation being proposed. With the Honest Ads Act, for example, the government is proposing that online advertising be regulated the same way print, radio and television are. This would require more transparency from the likes of Facebook, Twitter and Google about who’s paying for political advertisements on their apps or sites.
Senator Mark Warner (D-VA) told NPR earlier this year that the bill, which he introduced alongside Senators John McCain (R-AZ) and Amy Klobuchar (D-MN), was born after months of asking social media companies to “come clean” with the level of Russian interference that took place in 2016. “We don’t want to slow down innovation. We don’t want to slow down individuals’ willingness to use the internet or use these social media platforms,” he said. “But in an era where $1.4 billion was spent on political advertising in the 2016 campaigns — and that number [is] only going to go up — there needs to be equality between traditional radio and broadcast and social media and internet political advertising.”
US Senators Amy Klobuchar (D-MN) and Mark Warner (D-VA) introducing the Honest Ads Act
If Facebook, Twitter and Google were to be regulated, that could be one way to hold them accountable for their oversights and force them to be more transparent — something they roundly failed to do both during and after the 2016 election. Of course, as is often the case with any proposed legislation, it could take some time for the Honest Ads Act or other bills like it to become law. Or it could never happen at all.
There are experts like Paul Levinson, a professor of communications and media studies at Fordham University, who believe that might be for the best, since they don’t see how the government can regulate these companies and what people share on their platforms without infringing on First Amendment rights. After all, not everyone who posts or advertises on Facebook, Twitter and Google is a Russian troll.
“I don’t see Congress trying to legislate an algorithm, because that is beyond the regulatory reach and competence of the government.” — US Representative Adam Schiff (D-CA)
It’s possible that in 2018 Congress will propose more bills like the Honest Ads Act that are designed to curb tech companies’ influence in politics. The efforts to contain them thus far have been bipartisan, suggesting that social media’s road to federal regulation may be more than a pipe dream for the government. Representative Adam Schiff (D-CA), ranking member of the House Intelligence Committee, told Engadget that Congress needs to exercise much more oversight to understand how software algorithms used by Facebook, Twitter and Google work.
But he doesn’t see “trying to legislate an algorithm, because that is beyond the regulatory reach and competence of the government.” He said that because technology changes so quickly, “any prescriptive laws Congress might pass along such lines would likely be made obsolete” in no time. “That doesn’t mean that government should not act where we can, however,” he added, “particularly if the current technologies leave us vulnerable to foreign manipulation or have the effect of deepening divisions in our country.”
Schiff said there are representatives and senators from both parties interested in legislation that would regulate political-ad disclosures on social media. He also said that, down the road, it will be necessary for the intelligence community to work closely with tech companies to prevent any future attacks on our country’s democratic process.
“When the intelligence community gathers information that a foreign adversary is exploiting the use of these platforms in a clandestine way to influence our elections,” he said, “it should have a mechanism like we use in the counterterrorism context to share that information with the technology companies.” Schiff said that ultimately, these joint efforts between the government and tech firms will be crucial to prepare for any upcoming elections.
“When the intelligence community gathers information that a foreign adversary is exploiting the use of these platforms in a clandestine way to influence our elections, it should have a mechanism like we use in the counterterrorism context to share that information with the technology companies.”
He said that, as part of the Intelligence Committee hearings, he’s asked Facebook, Twitter and Google to create a joint report on how Russia played their systems, so that the committee can be fully informed before making any recommendations that might affect how they do business. “Although the companies have yet to commit to such a report,” he said, “it is my hope that they will do so.”
If a bill like the Honest Ads Act does become law, tech companies could be prone to government fines if they don’t follow set regulations. That would be akin to when US wireless carriers violate consumer disclosures and the FCC has to step in, often slapping them with hundreds of millions of dollars in fines.
What’s clear is that the government isn’t interested in regulating your tweets or Facebook posts about how much you love or hate Donald Trump. (That would be a clear violation of the First Amendment.) Instead, the committee simply intends to keep a better eye on the political ads that you see on social media, to ensure that foreign agents aren’t interfering in our elections. This doesn’t mean you, the user, can be out there promoting hate speech on your timeline, since Twitter or Facebook might take it upon themselves to ban you. (Unless you’re the president of the United States, of course.)
Levinson said that, generally speaking and no matter the reason, the US government shouldn’t try to regulate Facebook, Twitter, Google or any other social media company because “they have no idea what they’re talking about” or how the internet works. If anything, he said, these tech giants should be working harder on self-regulating, which would mean depending less on algorithms and more on humans.
For Levinson, the ideal system to fight bots promoting sketchy political ads and fake news would be to identify fake, ill-minded accounts more quickly and to cancel them immediately. He also said there needs to be a better way to distinguish fake news from real articles or a post from people simply expressing their opinion — even if certain people don’t agree with it. In order for that to happen and be successful, though, Levinson said algorithms from Facebook and Twitter need to experience some trial and error before they can be perfected. That’s why you sometimes see bogus content slip through the cracks.
I am concerned about the government dominating and destroying the essence of the internet.
Paul Levinson, professor of communications and media studies at Fordham University
Levinson added that it’s hard to say how the government could enforce rules on social media companies, but if it comes close to infringing on people’s First Amendment rights, that would cause some civil issues. Levinson said he imagines there would be thousands of cases in the courts, noting that he believes any regulation could be a real threat to the internet as we know it. “Everyone’s so concerned about net neutrality. I don’t really care about whether corporations dominate or don’t dominate, there’s no way any corporation’s going to tell anyone what they can or can’t say,” he said. “But I am concerned about the government dominating and destroying the essence of the internet.”
Regardless of what happens, one thing is indisputable: The government and these tech companies will need to work more closely in 2018 and beyond, in order to ensure that history doesn’t repeat itself. It won’t be easy, because there are business models and, most importantly, people’s First Amendment rights at stake. Hopefully Facebook, Twitter, Google and the government will figure out the best way to keep Russian (and other foreign) trolls and bots at bay. Otherwise we’ll be talking about this again in 2020.
Check out all of Engadget’s year-in-review coverage right here.
The Nintendo Switch’s GPU is key to installing unofficial games
Game console manufacturers don’t particularly like hackers, but Nintendo’s relationship with them has always been particularly tenuous. At a recent hacking conference in Germany a team presented their efforts at getting homebrew games on Nintendo’s latest console, the Switch. As spotted by Wololo, bypassing typical safeguards apparently comes down to Nintendo’s use of an off-the-shelf NVIDIA Tegra chip, and the backdoor that the silicon-maker left for itself.
As with November’s Pegaswitch news, you’ll need to stay on Switch firmware 3.0 once the hackers release their homebrew launcher. And if you’ve kept the hybrid console offline in the hopes of a hack, picking up a physical copy of Pokken Tournament DX will have the firmware version needed for access. Curious to see how the hackers got to where they are with the exploit? Peep the video below.
There isn’t a definite timeline for when to expect homemade games on the console, but hacker Plutoo promises homebrew will be here “soon.” It should be noted hacking your system will void the warranty so if you’re worried about that sort of thing, don’t do it.
Via: Wololo
Source: Media.ccc.de (YouTube)
Facebook deletes accounts of Chechnya leader hit with US sanctions
Ramzan Kadyrov, Head of the Chechen Republic and one of Vladimir Putin’s staunchest allies, was a frequent Facebook and Instagram user up until recently. The controversial leader found himself locked out of both social networks on December 23rd, leaving him unable to post photos of himself snuggling tigers and death threats against Chechnya’s and Russia’s critics. A Facebook rep told The New York Times that the company was legally obligated to boot Kadyrov off its platforms after the US imposed financial and travel sanctions on him.
The United States added Kadyrov to the sanction list due to multiple allegations of human rights violations — his name is frequently linked to torture, kidnapping and murder. While people in the strongman’s crosshairs are probably happy that they won’t have to read his threats on social media, the deletion of his accounts reflects poorly on Facebook. The social network hasn’t banned other people hit by US sanctions, after all, including Venezuelan President Nicolas Maduro who the US describes as “a dictator who disregards the will of the Venezuelan people.”
Clearly, Facebook doesn’t have a hard and fast rule when it comes to dealing with accounts owned by people in the sanction list. If it does have a rule, which doesn’t appear in its community standards page, then it definitely hasn’t been consistently implementing it. The fact that the travel and trade sanctions imposed on Kadyrov have nothing to do with social media is a point of contention, as well.
Jennifer Stisa Granick, a staff attorney with the American Civil Liberties Union’s Speech, Privacy and Technology project, said:
“This sanctions law, which was written for one purpose, is being used to suppress speech with little consideration of the free expression values and the special risks of blocking speech, as opposed to blocking commerce or funds as the sanctions was designed to do. That’s really problematic.”
Russian internet watchdog Roskomnadzor demanded answers from Facebook a few days after Kadyrov’s ban came to light. The man himself says he’s not affected by what he describes as “petty US rat race,” but wants to ask the government: “Where is your praised democracy and the right of citizens to receive information? Or do 4 million followers (his combined Facebook and Instagram followers) mean nothing?”
Source: The New York Times, The Guardian
AIVAnet 