Year: 2018

30 Apr 2018

Want to talk about the future? Join me on Technotopia

Technotopia is a podcast about the future. It assumes the world won’t fall into a dystopia and therefore is optimistic about our chances for human success. I’m looking for cool people to talk to and I’d like for you to join me.

I love guests who are excited about the future and technology but I do not require a technology background. I want artists, writers, programmers, makers, and thinkers. I want to ask smart people why we shouldn’t despair.

Want to join in? Fill this out to schedule a time. PR people fill it out as if you were your client so I can contact them directly. I usually record a few episodes a week so I have a nice buffer during the month.

Before you come on:
1. Listen to at least one episode. You can check it out here.
2. Understand you are not pitching your company or project. This is a discussion about the future. No CMOs or PR people unless you also play a mean theremin.
3. The only question I really ask is “What will the world look like in 20 years?” Everything else stems from that. Be prepared for a conversation.
4. I prefer doers to marketers.
5. Please be energetic. I feed off of your energy . The worst podcasts are the ones where I get your in-booth pitch from whatever conference you just attended. The best ones are when you are ready and excited to talk about the future.

If you have any questions email me at john@techcrunch.com. Otherwise I’m looking forward to chatting with you.

30 Apr 2018

Facebook is trying to block Schrems II privacy referral to EU top court

Facebook’s lawyers are attempting to block a High Court decision in Ireland, where its international business is headquartered, to refer a long-running legal challenge to the bloc’s top court.

The social media giant’s lawyers asked the court to stay the referral to the CJEU today, Reuters reports. Facebook is trying to appeal the referral by challenging Irish case law — and wants a stay granted in the meanwhile.

The case relates to a complaint filed by privacy campaigner and lawyer Max Schrems regarding a transfer mechanism that’s currently used by thousands of companies to authorize flows of personal data on EU citizens to the US for processing. Though Schrems was actually challenging the use of so-called Standard Contractual Clauses (SCCs) by Facebook, specifically, when he updated an earlier complaint on the same core data transfer issue — which relates to US government mass surveillance practices, as revealed by the 2013 Snowden disclosures — with Ireland’s data watchdog.

However the Irish Data Protection Commissioner decided to refer the issue to the High Court to consider the legality of SCCs as a whole. And earlier this month the High Court decided to refer a series questions relating to EU-US data transfers to Europe’s top court — seeking a preliminary ruling on a series of fundamental questions that could even unseat another data transfer mechanism, called the EU-US Privacy Shield, depending on what CJEU judges decide.

An earlier legal challenge by Schrems — which was also related to the clash between US mass surveillance programs (which harvest data from social media services) and EU fundamental rights (which mandate that web users’ privacy is protected) — resulted in the previous arrangement for transatlantic data flows being struck down by the CJEU in 2015, after standing for around 15 years.

Hence the current case being referred to by privacy watchers as ‘Schrems II’. You can also see why Facebook is keen to delay another CJEU referral if it can.

According to comments made by Schrems on Twitter the Irish High Court reserved judgement on Facebook’s request today, with a decision expected within a week…

Facebook’s appeal is based on trying to argue against Irish case law — which Schrems says does not allow for an appeal against such a referral, hence he’s couching it as another delaying tactic by the company:

We reached out to Facebook for comment on the case. At the time of writing it had not responded.

In a statement from October, after an earlier High Court decision on the case, Facebook said:

Standard Contract Clauses provide critical safeguards to ensure that Europeans’ data is protected once transferred to companies that operate in the US or elsewhere around the globe, and are used by thousands of companies to do business. They are essential to companies of all sizes, and upholding them is critical to ensuring the economy can continue to grow without disruption.

This ruling will have no immediate impact on the people or businesses who use our services. However it is essential that the CJEU now considers the extensive evidence demonstrating the robust protections in place under Standard Contractual Clauses and US law, before it makes any decision that may endanger the transfer of data across the Atlantic and around the globe.

30 Apr 2018

Stripe expands its Atlas startup kit to let founders form LLCs

Payments company Stripe is today taking another step to expand its operations into a wider set of business services, targeting the startups that form its core base of customers.

Today, the company is announcing that Atlas, the all-in-one service Stripe started two years ago to help founders incorporate in Delaware, can now be used to set up Delaware-based limited liability companies.

As with the C-Corp set-up, Atlas for LLCs costs $500, which includes forming new entity, getting a tax ID, getting a U.S. business bank account and Stripe account, access to expert tax and legal advice, tools for handling taxes, and credits with a number of services; as well as access to the Stripe Atlas Community for networking and extra resources.

Stripe is running a waiting list now for the beta, which should start in the next couple of weeks.

Alongside C-Corps, LLCs are another primary business format that technology founders use when building their companies. They are often the route that a company takes if it’s initially thinking that it will not raise money from outside investors or start small, or just doesn’t want to take the leap initially into a future scenario for the company where a C-Corp structure might be needed.

As Patrick McKenzie, who works on Atlas for Stripe, notes, the benefits for those who know they might not be raising externally right away is that founders have limited liability, there are less tax filings and other housekeeping needs. LLCs are used for holding companies, and small business like restaurants.

The idea here is that the LLC has now been optimised by Stripe specifically for the smaller tech company. This includes the ability to assign IP to the company, to be able to add team members after formation, and crucially to be able to convert the company to a C-Corp if and when you need to. (You can also use Stripe for this, and the cost again is kept low, starting at $500.)

“Startups are continuous creation machines, running experiments and rearchitecting themselves on the fly. Legal choices often force startups to predict the future: is this a side project or the next Google?” said McKenzie. “We think that some founders stop because they aren’t certain yet. So we sought to give founders more options to just get started.”

Stripe first launched Atlas two years ago as a toolkit for startups — initially those from outside the US, and then including US startups too — to set themselves up quickly as Delaware corporations, an essential first step before they can start to raise money. It eventually added more nuanced tools, such as the ability to issue shares.

Stripe does not release exact user numbers but estimates that 20 percent of technology companies that currently incorporate as C Corporations in Delaware are using Stripe Atlas to do so, underscoring how the company’s push into services adjacent to payments — an important way for Stripe to increase its margins and improve its loyalty with users — is coming good.

Stripe was valued at over $9 billion when it last raised money, a $150 million round in 2016.

30 Apr 2018

Halide’s iOS camera app now lets you strip the location data from your photos

Halide, the premium iOS camera app from ex-Apple designer Sebastiaan de With and Twitter engineer Ben Sandofsky is today launching one of its biggest upgrades since its arrival last year. The updated app includes a Self-Timer, redesigned photo reviewer, accessibility improvements, and more. But perhaps its best feature is the ability to take better control over your photo privacy – by pulling the location information out of your photos’ metadata before you share.

What has made Halide stand out from others was its combination of an attractive, gesture-based interface designed to simplify the use of pro camera features. This made the app a great option for casual photographers and pros alike.

The existing app includes features like a manual focus dial, an intelligent automatic mode for getting the sharpest shot, RAW and JPG capture support, a grid and level tool, and live histogram.

Now the app is gaining a handful of other useful additions, like the new Apple Watch companion.

With the Apple Watch app installed, photographers can do things like remotely frame their shots, trigger Halide’s shutter and set timers. That way you can position your shot and then snap it, right from your wrist.

However, users without an Apple Watch can use the new Self Timer function instead. With this, you can set a timer of 3, 10 or 30 seconds. When activated, the shutter button stays depressed and you’ll see a countdown in the icon around the button itself.

The updated app also introduces a new photo reviewer. Users can now scroll through a grid of their shots, then flip back to the camera to snap more.

Accessibility improvements rolling out today include the addition of Dynamic and Bold Type and VoiceOver support. Halide’s creators note, too, that the 30-second timer was built with accessibility in mind – allowing users with more limited mobility a better way to take photos.

However, one of the app’s bigger changes is around photo privacy.

Many people don’t know (or forget to think about) that our personal photos contain a lot of private data. Hidden in the photo file’s metadata is information about the camera, lens and flash settings, date and time, and the geolocation of the photos. That’s information that you may not want to share – especially if you’re planning to post the photo publicly to the web or on social media.

Halide now makes it simple to remove location data from the photo with the flip of a new toggle switch. And it can aid you with limiting the location sharing with Facebook, Instagram and WhatsApp, too.

The company isn’t talking about download numbers, but says its app is now being used by over 100,000 people on a monthly basis, according to Apple’s opt-in analytics. (Halide doesn’t use third-party tracking.) That’s fairly decent number for a paid application serving the more niche pro consumer crowd.

“Considering we don’t pursue growth tactics like emails or push notifications, we’re incredibly proud of this,” says Sandofsky of the usage. “We think we’ve solved a genuine need for many people,” he adds.

Halide is a paid download ($5.99) on the App Store.

30 Apr 2018

Safaricom rolls out Bonga social networking platform to augment M-Pesa

When it comes to monetizing digital social interactions, Kenya’s Safaricom has its own order. American tech companies such as Facebook and Twitter offered social networks first, then moved to commercialize them.

Through its M-Pesa mobile money product, Safaricom built one of Africa’s most robust commercial webs and now aims to leverage it as a social network.

The vehicle is the company’s new Bonga platform, something Kenya’s largest telco rolls out in pilot phase this week. An outgrowth of the Safaricom’s Alpha innovation incubator, “Bonga is a conversational and transactional social network,” Shikoh Gitau, Alpha’s Head of Products told TechCrunch.

“It’s focused on pay, play, and purpose…as the three main things our research found people do on our payment and mobile network,” she said. Gitau offered examples: pay could be using M-Pesa and SMS to coordinate anything from tuition payments to e-commerce, play spans online sports betting to gaming, and purpose includes SMS or WhatsApp chat groups that raise money for weddings, holidays, or Kenya’s informal investment groups.

“In our [Bonga] research we’ve said ‘what can we do to build upon those three network behaviors in our network that is Safaricom?,’” she said.

I recently sat in on an Alpha product development session in Nairobi and talked to Safaricom CIO Kamal Battacharya on his vision for the product late last year, as reported at TechCrunch.

“Safaricom’s unique in that we have telco services and a financial services platform that connect nearly every household in Kenya largely on the basis of trade,” he said.

“We’d actually like to move beyond M-Pesa by leveraging its power as a social network to connect people to other product solutions.”

As a telco, Safaricom­—still  has 69 percent of the Kenya’s mobile subscribers. Its M-Pesa fintech app―which generated $525 million of the company’s $2 billion annual revenues―boasts 27 million customers across a network of 136,000 agents.

Through in-house development and partnerships, the company continues to add consumer and small business-based products to its mobile and fintech network. These include digital TV, the M-Kopa solar-powered lighting kit, and Lipa-Na bill pay service.

This week Safaricom will offer Bonga to a test group of 600 users, before updating the product, allowing the initial group to refer it to friends, and then extending the platform in three phases.

Bonga Sasa will facilitate messaging and money transfer between individuals, “enabling users to send or receive money while conversing with each other,” according to a Safaricom release. For example, through Bonga Sasa a parent can send money to the child without having to leave the platform to access another money transfer tool.

Bonga Baraza, expected in mid-2018, will allow users to collect money for purpose driven events, including Kenya’s harambee collective fundraising drives.

Bonga Biashara will build on this use of social networks for commerce. Digitizing Kenya’s extensive informal trading commerce is at play here. Alpha’s research found roughly “2.5 million people doing side-hustles with a smartphone in Kenya” and 12.5 million total running small businesses on smart and USSD devices, according to Gitau.

Bonga will channel Facebook, YouTube, iTunes, PayPal, and eBay in one platform. Users will be able to create business profiles parallel to their personal social media profiles and M-Pesa accounts and sell online. Bonga will also include space for Kenya’s creative class to upload, shape, and distribute artistic products and content.

As for Safaricom’s Bonga monetization plan, it’s not an immediate priority, according to the Alpha team members I spoke to. “We’ll offer it for free for now, and it’s connected to M-Pesa, which is already monetized,” said Gitau. “The more these services grow and grow small businesses the more they grow M-Pesa..which is already profitable.”

Safaricom is exploring how to take Bonga beyond Kenya’s borders, which could include markets where both M-Pesa and Vodafone are present: currently 10 in Europe, Africa, and South Asia.

Photo courtesy of Flickr/WorldRemit

30 Apr 2018

Disrupt SF ‘18 super early bird prices disappear in three days

Don’t let procrastination drain your time and productivity — or your wallet. You have exactly three days left to save up to $1,800 on Super Early Bird pricing for Disrupt San Francisco 2018 — the premiere tech conference related to all things startup. Disrupt SF takes place September 5-7 at Moscone Center West, and it’s one of the most productive ways early-stage startup founders, investors and technologists can spend their time. How much you spend to get there is up to you. Get your tickets today.

This year we’re building out Disrupt SF 2018 to be our biggest Disrupt ever. Our new venue offers three times the floor space, which will accommodate more than 10,000 attendees including over 1,200 startups and exhibitors. You can expect three jam-packed days of programming across 14 tech tracks and some of the top tech titans, movers, shakers and speakers to grace the Disrupt stage.

We’re still finalizing our list of speakers, but here’s a prime example. Anne Wojcicki, co-founder of 23andMe, and John Riccitiello of Unity will be joining us. Wojcicki’s an expert at pivoting and navigating the tricky waters of regulatory approval. And, according to DFJ Growth partner Barry Schuler, an investor in Unity, Riccitiello’s mobile gaming software company stands to become one of the most important technology companies of the next decade.

So many great speakers can’t help but generate the desire for more conversation, and that’s why we created Q &A Sessions. These are smaller, moderated panel discussions with curated questions from the audience. It’s the perfect opportunity to follow-up on any questions that came up during Main Stage interviews.

We’re taking Startup Battlefield to new heights this year, too. The best little startup pitch competition for launching your company on a global stage now boasts a grand prize of $100,000. What stopping you from applying? Do it right here, right now. Even better, you can use the same application process for Startup Alley and TC Top Picks.

If you want to exhibit your company in Startup Alley — and really, why wouldn’t you — there are two ways to exhibit and both require an application.

You can buy a Startup Alley Exhibitor Package, which includes one exhibit day, three Disrupt SF Founder passes, access to CrunchMatch (our platform that makes it easy for investors and founders to meet), use of the Startup Alley exhibitor lounge, access to the Disrupt press list and a chance to be voted as a Startup Battlefield Wildcard.

The other way to get in the Alley is to be chosen as a TC Top Pick and receive one free Startup Alley Exhibitor Package. TechCrunch editors will select a total of 60 startups — five from each of these 12 tech tracks: AI, AR/VR, Blockchain, Biotech, Fintech, Gaming, Healthtech, Privacy/Security, Space, Mobility, Retail or Robotics.

Here’s a big media-exposure bonus: TC Top Picks also get a three-minute Showcase Stage interview with a TechCrunch editor and coverage across our social media platforms.

Be sure to sign up for alerts about how you can participate in our Virtual Hackathon. Join forces with thousands of tech developers, designers and dreamers from around the world and build something new to solve real-world problems.

Disrupt San Francisco 2018 takes place September 5-7. Why pay more than you have to for all of this amazing startup goodness? Early bird pricing flies away on May 3 — just three short days away. Get your tickets right here.

30 Apr 2018

Younger consumers adopt voice technology faster, but use voice assistants less, report claims

Here’s an odd juxtaposition for you. According to a new report on voice assistants released today by PwC, younger users are adopting voice technology at a faster rate than their older counterparts, but are somehow using their voice assistants less often. The report found that users 18 through 24 had fewer “heavy” users of voice technology, compared with those 25 to 49, and 50 or older.

The study also found that 8 percent of the youngest demographic said they only used a voice assistant a few times per year, compared with 6 percent of those 25 to 49, and only 3 percent of those 50 and up.

That’s an interesting finding, if accurate, given that younger users tend to be not only those who adopt technology at a quicker pace than older people, but who use it more frequently, as well.

And the issue isn’t one of general awareness it seems. Adoption of voice technology across platforms – including phones, tablets, computers, speakers, wearables, TV remotes and cars – is being driven by younger consumers, says PwC, along with households with children, and those households with incomes of over $100,000.

In addition, while the majority of those 18 to 24 say they use their voice assistant the same (22%) or more (55%) than they did when they first started, a sizable 23 percent said they use it less often.

On the smartphone, 16 percent of all users said they use it less often, and on speaker devices, like Amazon Echo, 12 percent said they use it less often. The flip side of this finding is that speakers are actually doing better than smartphones in terms of increased usage of voice over time. 61 percent said they’re using their voice speakers more since they started, while only 52 percent say they use their smartphone voice assistant more.

So if not familiarity or adoption, what’s causing the youngest users to limit the time they spend using voice? The report claims it’s basically an image thing.

That is, younger users prefer to use voice technology in private instead of in public. They said that using voice assistants in public “just looks weird.” And because younger users likely spend more time outside the home, they end up using voice assistants less.

This has led to a situation where the youngest users are taking advantage of voice assistants less frequently on a daily basis. 59 percent of 18 to 24 year olds speak to a voice assistant at least once per day, compared with 65 percent of 25 to 49 year olds.

But young users aren’t alone in their preference for using voice in private. Overall, the majority of people (74%) are regularly using voice technology in the home, while cooking, multitasking, watching TV, and lounging in bed, for example.

And despite the advances in voice assistant’s capabilities – playing games, using voice apps, shopping, or offering smart home control – the majority of consumers are still using them for basic tasks like checking the weather or news, playing music, and searching for something that would normally be typed into a search engine.

There are still some barriers to the adoption of voice technology, however, including consumer’s concerns that assistants are growing too complex or expensive, a limited understand of what to do with voice devices, and lack of trust.

In fact, 38 percent said they wouldn’t want something “listening in” on their life all the time, which is what people believe adding a voice device to their home implies.

Largely, trust was a concern in other areas, too – with people not trusting the voice device to process a shopping order correctly, concerned about the security of payments through voice, or worried that their kids would figure out a way to order items without approval. (Alexa devices faced this issue at first, but Amazon has since built in purchase controls.)

Generally, the consumer experience of using voice seems to be well-received by most, but voice assistant technology makers will do well to learn from social media’s user privacy debacles, and take steps to protect consumer privacy, not sell data, and refrain from being “creepy,” PwC suggests.

30 Apr 2018

Twitter also sold data access to Cambridge Analytica researcher

Since it was revealed that Cambridge Analytica improperly accessed the personal data of millions of Facebook users, one question has lingered in the minds of the public: What other data did Dr. Aleksandr Kogan gain access to?

Twitter confirmed to The Telegraph on Saturday that GSR, Kogan’s own commercial enterprise, had purchased one-time API access to a random sample of public tweets from a five-month period between December 2014 and April 2015. Twitter told Bloomberg that, following an internal review, the company did not find any access to private data about people who use Twitter.

Twitter sells API access to large organizations or enterprises for the purposes of surveying sentiment or opinion during various events, or around certain topics or ideas.

Here’s what a Twitter spokesperson said to The Telegraph:

Twitter has also made the policy decision to off-board advertising from all accounts owned and operated by Cambridge Analytica. This decision is based on our determination that Cambridge Analytica operates using a business model that inherently conflicts with acceptable Twitter Ads business practices. Cambridge Analytica may remain an organic user on our platform, in accordance with the Twitter Rules.

Obviously, this doesn’t have the same scope as the data harvested about users on Facebook. Twitter’s data on users is far less personal. Location on the platform is opt-in and generic at that, and users are not forced to use their real name on the platform.

Still, it shows just how broad the Cambridge Analytica data collection was ahead of the 2016 election.

We reached out to Twitter and will update when we hear back.

30 Apr 2018

Europe eyeing bot IDs, ad transparency and blockchain to fight fakes

European Union lawmakers want online platforms to come up with their own systems to identify bot accounts.

This is as part of a voluntary Code of Practice the European Commission now wants platforms to develop and apply — by this summer — as part of a wider package of proposals it’s put out which are generally aimed at tackling the problematic spread and impact of disinformation online.

The proposals follow an EC-commissioned report last month, by its High-Level Expert Group, which recommended more transparency from online platforms to help combat the spread of false information online — and also called for urgent investment in media and information literacy education, and strategies to empower journalists and foster a diverse and sustainable news media ecosystem.

Bots, fake accounts, political ads, filter bubbles

In an announcement on Friday the Commission said it wants platforms to establish “clear marking systems and rules for bots” in order to ensure “their activities cannot be confused with human interactions”. It does not go into a greater level of detail on how that might be achieved. Clearly it’s intending platforms to have to come up with relevant methodologies.

Identifying bots is not an exact science — as academics conducting research into how information spreads online could tell you. The current tools that exist for trying to spot bots typically involve rating accounts across a range of criteria to give a score of how likely an account is to be algorithmically controlled vs human controlled. But platforms do at least have a perfect view into their own systems, whereas academics have had to rely on the variable level of access platforms are willing to give them.

Another factor here is that given the sophisticated nature of some online disinformation campaigns — the state-sponsored and heavily resourced efforts by Kremlin backed entities such as Russia’s Internet Research Agency, for example — if the focus ends up being algorithmically controlled bots vs IDing bots that might have human agents helping or controlling them, plenty of more insidious disinformation agents could easily slip through the cracks.

That said, other measures in the EC’s proposals for platforms include stepping up their existing efforts to shutter fake accounts and being able to demonstrate the “effectiveness” of such efforts — so greater transparency around how fake accounts are identified and the proportion being removed (which could help surface more sophisticated human-controlled bot activity on platforms too).

Another measure from the package: The EC says it wants to see “significantly” improved scrutiny of ad placements — with a focus on trying to reduce revenue opportunities for disinformation purveyors.

Restricting targeting options for political advertising is another component. “Ensure transparency about sponsored content relating to electoral and policy-making processes,” is one of the listed objectives on its fact sheet — and ad transparency is something Facebook has said it’s prioritizing since revelations about the extent of Kremlin disinformation on its platform during the 2016 US presidential election, with expanded tools due this summer.

The Commission also says generally that it wants platforms to provide “greater clarity about the functioning of algorithms” and enable third-party verification — though there’s no greater level of detail being provided at this point to indicate how much algorithmic accountability it’s after from platforms.

We’ve asked for more on its thinking here and will update this story with any response. It looks to be seeking to test the water to see how much of the workings of platforms’ algorithmic blackboxes can be coaxed from them voluntarily — such as via measures targeting bots and fake accounts — in an attempt to stave off formal and more fulsome regulations down the line.

Filter bubbles also appear to be informing the Commission’s thinking, as it says it wants platforms to make it easier for users to “discover and access different news sources representing alternative viewpoints” — via tools that let users customize and interact with the online experience to “facilitate content discovery and access to different news sources”.

Though another stated objective is for platforms to “improve access to trustworthy information” — so there are questions about how those two aims can be balanced, i.e. without efforts towards one undermining the other. 

On trustworthiness, the EC says it wants platforms to help users assess whether content is reliable using “indicators of the trustworthiness of content sources”, as well as by providing “easily accessible tools to report disinformation”.

In one of several steps Facebook has taken since 2016 to try to tackle the problem of fake content being spread on its platform the company experimented with putting ‘disputed’ labels or red flags on potentially untrustworthy information. However the company discontinued this in December after research suggested negative labels could entrench deeply held beliefs, rather than helping to debunk fake stories.

Instead it started showing related stories — containing content it had verified as coming from news outlets its network of fact checkers considered reputable — as an alternative way to debunk potential fakes.

The Commission’s approach looks to be aligning with Facebook’s rethought approach — with the subjective question of how to make judgements on what is (and therefore what isn’t) a trustworthy source likely being handed off to third parties, given that another strand of the code is focused on “enabling fact-checkers, researchers and public authorities to continuously monitor online disinformation”.

Since 2016 Facebook has been leaning heavily on a network of local third party ‘partner’ fact-checkers to help identify and mitigate the spread of fakes in different markets — including checkers for written content and also photos and videos, the latter in an effort to combat fake memes before they have a chance to go viral and skew perceptions.

In parallel Google has also been working with external fact checkers, such as on initiatives such as highlighting fact-checked articles in Google News and search. 

The Commission clearly approves of the companies reaching out to a wider network of third party experts. But it is also encouraging work on innovative tech-powered fixes to the complex problem of disinformation — describing AI (“subject to appropriate human oversight”) as set to play a “crucial” role for “verifying, identifying and tagging disinformation”, and pointing to blockchain as having promise for content validation.

Specifically it reckons blockchain technology could play a role by, for instance, being combined with the use of “trustworthy electronic identification, authentication and verified pseudonyms” to preserve the integrity of content and validate “information and/or its sources, enable transparency and traceability, and promote trust in news displayed on the Internet”.

It’s one of a handful of nascent technologies the executive flags as potentially useful for fighting fake news, and whose development it says it intends to support via an existing EU research funding vehicle: The Horizon 2020 Work Program.

It says it will use this program to support research activities on “tools and technologies such as artificial intelligence and blockchain that can contribute to a better online space, increasing cybersecurity and trust in online services”.

It also flags “cognitive algorithms that handle contextually-relevant information, including the accuracy and the quality of data sources” as a promising tech to “improve the relevance and reliability of search results”.

The Commission is giving platforms until July to develop and apply the Code of Practice — and is using the possibility that it could still draw up new laws if it feels the voluntary measures fail as a mechanism to encourage companies to put the sweat in.

It is also proposing a range of other measures to tackle the online disinformation issue — including:

  • An independent European network of fact-checkers: The Commission says this will establish “common working methods, exchange best practices, and work to achieve the broadest possible coverage of factual corrections across the EU”; and says they will be selected from the EU members of the International Fact Checking Network which it notes follows “a strict International Fact Checking NetworkCode of Principles”
  • A secure European online platform on disinformation to support the network of fact-checkers and relevant academic researchers with “cross-border data collection and analysis”, as well as benefitting from access to EU-wide data
  • Enhancing media literacy: On this it says a higher level of media literacy will “help Europeans to identify online disinformation and approach online content with a critical eye”. So it says it will encourage fact-checkers and civil society organisations to provide educational material to schools and educators, and organise a European Week of Media Literacy
  • Support for Member States in ensuring the resilience of elections against what it dubs “increasingly complex cyber threats” including online disinformation and cyber attacks. Stated measures here include encouraging national authorities to identify best practices for the identification, mitigation and management of risks in time for the 2019 European Parliament elections. It also notes work by a Cooperation Group, saying “Member States have started to map existing European initiatives on cybersecurity of network and information systems used for electoral processes, with the aim of developing voluntary guidance” by the end of the year.  It also says it will also organise a high-level conference with Member States on cyber-enabled threats to elections in late 2018
  • Promotion of voluntary online identification systems with the stated aim of improving the “traceability and identification of suppliers of information” and promoting “more trust and reliability in online interactions and in information and its sources”. This includes support for related research activities in technologies such as blockchain, as noted above. The Commission also says it will “explore the feasibility of setting up voluntary systems to allow greater accountability based on electronic identification and authentication scheme” — as a measure to tackle fake accounts. “Together with others actions aimed at improving traceability online (improving the functioning, availability and accuracy of information on IP and domain names in the WHOIS system and promoting the uptake of the IPv6 protocol), this would also contribute to limiting cyberattacks,” it adds
  • Support for quality and diversified information: The Commission is calling on Member States to scale up their support of quality journalism to ensure a pluralistic, diverse and sustainable media environment. The Commission says it will launch a call for proposals in 2018 for “the production and dissemination of quality news content on EU affairs through data-driven news media”

It says it will aim to co-ordinate its strategic comms policy to try to counter “false narratives about Europe” — which makes you wonder whether debunking the output of certain UK tabloid newspapers might fall under that new EC strategy — and also more broadly to tackle disinformation “within and outside the EU”.

Commenting on the proposals in a statement, the Commission’s VP for the Digital Single Market, Andrus Ansip, said: Disinformation is not new as an instrument of political influence. New technologies, especially digital, have expanded its reach via the online environment to undermine our democracy and society. Since online trust is easy to break but difficult to rebuild, industry needs to work together with us on this issue. Online platforms have an important role to play in fighting disinformation campaigns organised by individuals and countries who aim to threaten our democracy.”

The EC’s next steps now will be bringing the relevant parties together — including platforms, the ad industry and “major advertisers” — in a forum to work on greasing cooperation and getting them to apply themselves to what are still, at this stage, voluntary measures.

“The forum’s first output should be an EU–wide Code of Practice on Disinformation to be published by July 2018, with a view to having a measurable impact by October 2018,” says the Commission. 

The first progress report will be published in December 2018. “The report will also examine the need for further action to ensure the continuous monitoring and evaluation of the outlined actions,” it warns.

And if self-regulation fails…

In a fact sheet further fleshing out its plans, the Commission states: “Should the self-regulatory approach fail, the Commission may propose further actions, including regulatory ones targeted at a few platforms.”

And for “a few” read: Mainstream social platforms — so likely the big tech players in the social digital arena: Facebook, Google, Twitter.

For potential regulatory actions tech giants only need look to Germany, where a 2017 social media hate speech law has introduced fines of up to €50M for platforms that fail to comply with valid takedown requests within 24 hours for simple cases, for an example of the kind of scary EU-wide law that could come rushing down the pipe at them if the Commission and EU states decide its necessary to legislate.

Though justice and consumer affairs commissioner, Vera Jourova, signaled in January that her preference on hate speech at least was to continue pursuing the voluntary approach — though she also said some Member State’s ministers are open to a new EU-level law should the voluntary approach fail.

In Germany the so-called NetzDG law has faced criticism for pushing platforms towards risk aversion-based censorship of online content. And the Commission is clearly keen to avoid such charges being leveled at its proposals, stressing that if regulation were to be deemed necessary “such [regulatory] actions should in any case strictly respect freedom of expression”.

Commenting on the Code of Practice proposals, a Facebook spokesperson told us: “People want accurate information on Facebook – and that’s what we want too. We have invested in heavily in fighting false news on Facebook by disrupting the economic incentives for the spread of false news, building new products and working with third-party fact checkers.”

A Twitter spokesman declined to comment on the Commission’s proposals but flagged contributions he said the company is already making to support media literacy — including an event last week at its EMEA HQ.

At the time of writing Google had not responded to a request for comment.

Last month the Commission did further tighten the screw on platforms over terrorist content specifically —  saying it wants them to get this taken down within an hour of a report as a general rule. Though it still hasn’t taken the step to cement that hour ‘rule’ into legislation, also preferring to see how much action it can voluntarily squeeze out of platforms via a self-regulation route.

 

30 Apr 2018

Fitbit will use Google Cloud to make its data available to doctors

Fitbit this morning announced plans to utilize Google’s new Cloud Healthcare API, in order to continue its push into the world of serious healthcare devices. It’s a bit of a no-brainer as far as partnerships go.

Google announced Cloud for Healthcare, taking a major step into the world of health, which comprised around $3.3 trillion in U.S. spending in 2016 alone. Unchecked, that number is expected to balloon even further over the next several years.

For its part, the company is leveraging existing cloud offerings to create an information sharing infrastructure for the massive world of healthcare. In its earliest stages, Google partnered with medical facilities like the Stanford School of Medicine, so a deal with Fitbit should prove a solid step toward mainstreaming its offering.

For Fitbit, the deal means moving a step closer toward healthcare legitimacy. At a recent event, CEO James Park told us that health was set to comprise a big part of the consumer electronics company’s plans moving forward. It’s clear he wasn’t quite as all-in with Jawbone, which shuttered the consumer side entirely, but there’s definitely money to be made for a company that can make legitimate health tracking ubiquitous.

The plan is to offer a centralized stop for doctors to monitor both electronic medical records and regular monitoring from Fitbit’s devices. Recently acquired Twine Health, meanwhile, will help the company give more insight into issues like diabetes and hypertension.

No word yet on a timeline for when all of this will become widely available.