February 2018 - nexa - server-nexa.polito.it

'Fiction is outperforming reality': how YouTube's algorithm distorts truth | Technology
by Alberto Cammozzo Feb. 3, 2018

Feb. 3, 2018

<https://www.theguardian.com/technology/2018/feb/02/how-youtubes-algorithm-d…> [...] The software Chaslot wrote was designed to provide the world’s first window into YouTube’s opaque recommendation engine. The program simulates the behaviour of a user who starts on one video and then follows the chain of recommended videos – much as I did after watching the Logan Paul video – tracking data along the way. It finds videos through a word search, selecting a “seed” video to begin with, and recording several layers of videos that YouTube recommends in the “up next” column. It does so with no viewing history, ensuring the videos being detected are YouTube’s generic recommendations, rather than videos personalised to a user. And it repeats the process thousands of times, accumulating layers of data about YouTube recommendations to build up a picture of the algorithm’s preferences. Over the last 18 months, Chaslot has used the program to explore bias in YouTube content promoted during the French, British and German elections, global warming and mass shootings, and published his findings on his website, Algotransparency.com. Each study finds something different, but the research suggests YouTube systematically amplifies videos that are divisive, sensational and conspiratorial. [...]

1 0

The Face Value of Bitcoin: Proof of Work and the Labour Theory of Value
by Alberto Cammozzo Feb. 2, 2018

Feb. 2, 2018

Bitcoin non sarebbe denaro per i teorici libertari capitalisti, ma dovrebbe esserlo è per quelli marxisti... <https://blog.p2pfoundation.net/face-value-bitcoin-proof-work-labour-theory-…> Bitcoin was created to be a new kind of money rooted in a vision of a market not bound by geography, banks and governments. Despite the intentions of its creators, Bitcoin is not money. It was designed with a faulty understanding of money, and as a result has a bug, a kind of a short circuit that kick-started an asset bubble and that will eventually turn Bitcoin into a toxic asset. In order to to fix this bug we need to employ the labour theory of value. Writing at New Economic Perspectives, Eric Tymoigne, a research associate at the Levy Economics Institute, argues that the fair price of Bitcoin is zero. Tymoigne’s reasoning is based on the the fact that money is a financial instrument. The value of a financial instrument can come from being redeemable to its issuer, from providing an income stream or from having a collateralized value. For example US Dollars are redeemable against taxes. Bonds bear interest and stocks pay dividends. Gold coins contain gold, which can be sold as a commodity. Since Bitcoin is not redeemable, provides no income and has no collateralized value, it is worthless as a financial instrument. Thus, its “fair price” is zero. Eric concludes that “Bitcoins are purely speculative assets.” >From the point of view of modern finance, Bitcoin is not money at all. [...] Ironically, while libertarian capitalist theories of money can not account for Bitcoin, Marxist theories of money can. The face value of Bitcoin represents a certain worth in terms of the labour time embedded in the computation power used to mine it. The Marxist theory of money is a Proof of Work theory. For Marx, the value of all commodities is not subjective, but objective; all commodities have a value that is created by the labour required to produce them. The reason that money can be used as a way to express the price of other commodities is because it represents a certain amount of labour, which is also what the worth of the other commodities is based on. As Marx states in Grundrisse “1/x ounce of gold is in fact nothing more than 1/x hours of labour time materialized, objectified.” For Marx, the value of all commodities is not subjective, but objective; all commodities have a value that is created by the labour required to produce them. The reason that money can be used as a way to express the price of other commodities is because it represents a certain amount of labour, which is also what the worth of the other commodities is based on. As Marx states in Grundrisse “1/x ounce of gold is in fact nothing more than 1/x hours of labour time materialized, objectified.” Marx illustrates that the face value of money is a rational number. It always represents a specific ratio. In the case of gold, Marx employs the ratio between the amount of gold and the amount of labour, the work:gold ratio. The value of the total volume of gold is derived from the amount of work required to produce it. [] While the libertarian capitalist theory is not useful in determining the value of Bitcoin, Marxist theory is. Bitcoin does not need to be backed or collateralized in any reserve of useful commodities, but instead in the labour time required to produce it. Proof of work. The Bitcoin software employs an algorithm that increases the difficulty of the work needed as more mining capacity is added to the pool to keep the rate at the current limit that is configured in the software. This means that while the face value of Bitcoin represents a certain worth in terms of labour, this worth is not consistent. There is no fixed ratio between work and coin. More work creates more value, but instead of creating more coins with the same value each, it creates the same number of coins. Each coin has more value.

2 1

Connected toys violate European consumer law
by Alberto Cammozzo Feb. 2, 2018

Feb. 2, 2018

Rapporto dell'organizzazione governativa norvegese di protezione del consumeatore Forbrukerrådet (fondata nel 1954 !) <https://www.forbrukerradet.no/siste-nytt/connected-toys-violate-consumer-la…> The internet-connected toys My Friend Cayla and i-Que fail miserably when it comes to safeguarding basic consumer rights, security, and privacy. The Norwegian Consumer Council has looked at the terms and the technical features of selected connected toys. The findings show a serious lack of understanding of children’s rights to privacy and security. Based on what was discovered, consumer organizations in Europe and the United States in cooperation file formal complaints to relevant authorities on what seems to be obvious breaches of several consumer laws. – Children are especially vulnerable, and are entitled to products and services that safeguard their rights to security and privacy. As long as the manufacturers are not willing to take these issues seriously, Internet of things-technologies are not suited for toys, says Finn Myrstad, Head of section, digital services in the Norwegian Consumer Council. [] The toys fail at several points In their review of the toys, the Consumer Council has found several serious issues: Lack of security With simple steps, anyone can take control of the toys through a mobile phone. This makes it possible to talk and listen through the toy without having physical access to the toy.This lack of security could easily have been prevented, for example by making physical access to the toy required, or by requiring the user to press a button when pairing their phone with the toy. Illegal user terms Before using the toy, users must consent to the terms being changed without notice, that personal data can be used for targeted advertising, and that information may be shared with unnamed 3rd parties.This and other discoveries are, in the NCC’s opinion, in breach of the EU Unfair Contract Terms Directive, the EU Data Protection Directive, and possibly the Toy Safety Directive. Kids’ secrets are sharedAnything the child tells the doll is transferred to the U.S.-based company Nuance Communications, who specialize in speech recognition technologies. The company reserves the right to share this information with other third parties, and to use speech data for a wide variety of purposes. Kids are subject to hidden marketingThe toys are embedded with pre-programmed phrases, where they endorse different commercial products. For example, Cayla will happily talk about how much she loves different Disney movies. Meanwhile, the app-provider has a commercial relationship with Disney. []

1 0

Facebook to French court: nude painting did not prompt account's deletion | Technology | The Guardian
by Alberto Cammozzo Feb. 2, 2018

Feb. 2, 2018

Facebook to French court: nude painting did not prompt account's deletion <https://www.theguardian.com/technology/2018/feb/01/facebook-nude-painting-g…> Teacher says his account was shut down because he posted a Gustave Courbet painting of a woman’s genitals

1 0