Mreža

Morning Pikachu Dance. Winter has never been an obstacle to a good mood.
by Operative #UAarmy pic.twitter.com/B5efM39lcT

— Defense of Ukraine (@DefenceU) December 5, 2022

Notxor wrote:Mala je to baza, nekoliko terabajta.
Problem je što su se ljudi navikli na ovu mrežu, pa od šume ne vide onion.
I na telegramu fino radi.

bela maca wrote:meni radi .is

Mór Thököly wrote:

bela maca wrote:meni radi .is

+1

You can just feel it, the cumulative weight of this stagnation, in the tech that most of us encounter every day. The act of scrolling past the same dumb ad to peer at the same bad news on the same glass screen on the same social network: This is the stuck future. There is a sense that we have reached the end of the internet, and no one wants to be left holding the bag.

How these companies respond to this troubled new era will have major repercussions. This is why throughout 2022, we’ve been pitched a mishmash of virtual- and augmented-reality projects and “metaverse” concepts. It’s why the tech giants that preside over today’s toxic online communities are now promising to force them onto our faces. It’s why there’s brewing resentment among certain tech-industry heavyweights who believe they’ve seen their visions stymied. It’s why others are jumping ship, leaving massive planks of online infrastructure open to acquisition and further disarray.

There’s a palpable exhaustion with the whole enterprise, with the men who set out to build the future or at least get rich, and who accomplished only one and a half of those things.

Летећи Полип wrote:

You can just feel it, the cumulative weight of this stagnation, in the tech that most of us encounter every day. The act of scrolling past the same dumb ad to peer at the same bad news on the same glass screen on the same social network: This is the stuck future. There is a sense that we have reached the end of the internet, and no one wants to be left holding the bag.

How these companies respond to this troubled new era will have major repercussions. This is why throughout 2022, we’ve been pitched a mishmash of virtual- and augmented-reality projects and “metaverse” concepts. It’s why the tech giants that preside over today’s toxic online communities are now promising to force them onto our faces. It’s why there’s brewing resentment among certain tech-industry heavyweights who believe they’ve seen their visions stymied. It’s why others are jumping ship, leaving massive planks of online infrastructure open to acquisition and further disarray.

There’s a palpable exhaustion with the whole enterprise, with the men who set out to build the future or at least get rich, and who accomplished only one and a half of those things.

https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/technology/the-end-of-the-silicon-valley-myth/ar-AA15MibL

ontheotherhand wrote:1 veće istraživanje 


The Future of Truth and Misinformation Online

Experts are evenly split on whether the coming decade will see a reduction in false and misleading narratives online. Those forecasting improvement place their hopes in technological fixes and in societal solutions. Others think the dark side of human nature is aided more than stifled by technology.

The question arises, then: What will happen to the online information environment in the coming decade? In summer 2017, Pew Research Center and Elon University’s Imagining the Internet Center conducted a large canvassing of technologists, scholars, practitioners, strategic thinkers and others, asking them to react to this framing of the issue:

The rise of “fake news” and the proliferation of doctored narratives that are spread by humans and bots online are challenging publishers and platforms. Those trying to stop the spread of false information are working to design technical and human systems that can weed it out and minimize the ways in which bots and other schemes spread lies and misinformation.

The question: In the next 10 years, will trusted methods emerge to block false narratives and allow the most accurate information to prevail in the overall information ecosystem? Or will the quality and veracity of information online deteriorate due to the spread of unreliable, sometimes even dangerous, socially destabilizing ideas?

Respondents were then asked to choose one of the following answer options:

The information environment will improve – In the next 10 years, on balance, the information environment will be IMPROVED by changes that reduce the spread of lies and other misinformation online.

The information environment will NOT improve – In the next 10 years, on balance, the information environment will NOT BE improved by changes designed to reduce the spread of lies and other misinformation online.

Some 1,116 responded to this nonscientific canvassing: 51% chose the option that the information environment will not improve, and 49% said the information environment will improve. (See “About this canvassing of experts” for details about this sample.) Participants were next asked to explain their answers. This report concentrates on these follow-up responses.

Their reasoning revealed a wide range of opinions about the nature of these threats and the most likely solutions required to resolve them. But the overarching and competing themes were clear: Those who do not think things will improve felt that humans mostly shape technology advances to their own, not-fully-noble purposes and that bad actors with bad motives will thwart the best efforts of technology innovators to remedy today’s problems.

And those who are most hopeful believed that technological fixes can be implemented to bring out the better angels guiding human nature.

More specifically, the 51% of these experts who expect things will not improve generally cited two reasons:

The fake news ecosystem preys on some of our deepest human instincts:Respondents said humans’ primal quest for success and power – their “survival” instinct – will continue to degrade the online information environment in the next decade. They predicted that manipulative actors will use new digital tools to take advantage of humans’ inbred preference for comfort and convenience and their craving for the answers they find in reinforcing echo chambers.

Our brains are not wired to contend with the pace of technological change: These respondents said the rising speed, reach and efficiencies of the internet and emerging online applications will magnify these human tendencies and that technology-based solutions will not be able to overcome them. They predicted a future information landscape in which fake information crowds out reliable information. Some even foresaw a world in which widespread information scams and mass manipulation cause broad swathes of public to simply give up on being informed participants in civic life.

The 49% of these experts who expect things to improve generally inverted that reasoning:

Technology can help fix these problems: These more hopeful experts said the rising speed, reach and efficiencies of the internet, apps and platforms can be harnessed to rein in fake news and misinformation campaigns. Some predicted better methods will arise to create and promote trusted, fact-based news sources.

It is also human nature to come together and fix problems: The hopeful experts in this canvassing took the view that people have always adapted to change and that this current wave of challenges will also be overcome. They noted that misinformation and bad actors have always existed but have eventually been marginalized by smart people and processes. They expect well-meaning actors will work together to find ways to enhance the information environment. They also believe better information literacy among citizens will enable people to judge the veracity of material content and eventually raise the tone of discourse.

The majority of participants in this canvassing wrote detailed elaborations on their views. Some chose to have their names connected to their answers; others opted to respond anonymously. These findings do not represent all possible points of view, but they do reveal a wide range of striking observations.

Respondents collectively articulated several major themes tied to those insights and explained in the sections below the following graphic. Several longer additional sets of responses tied to these themes https://www.shopio.rs/.

The following section presents an overview of the themes found among the written responses, including a small selection of representative quotes supporting each point. Some comments are lightly edited for style or length.

Skup je organizovalo Udruženje za kreativnu industriju i Grupacija izdavačke delatnosti, knjižara i distributera knjiga Privredna komora Srbije:

WaltZucher wrote:

ontheotherhand wrote:1 veće istraživanje 


The Future of Truth and Misinformation Online

Experts are evenly split on whether the coming decade will see a reduction in false and misleading narratives online. Those forecasting improvement place their hopes in technological fixes and in societal solutions. Others think the dark side of human nature is aided more than stifled by technology.

https://www.shopio.rs/fiskalne-kase-cena/ 

Ovo istraživanje pokazuje da stručnjaci imaju podijeljena mišljenja o tome da li će narednih deset godina doći do smanjenja lažnih i zavaravajućih priča online. Oni koji predviđaju poboljšanje polažu nade u tehnološka rješenja i društvene rješenja. Drugi smatraju da tehnologija više pomaže nego što stvara prepreke zlu ljudskog prirode.

Međutim, s obzirom na to da tehnologija stalno napreduje i da se društva stalno mijenjaju, teško je sa sigurnošću reći šta nas očekuje u budućnosti u vezi s lažnim i zavaravajućim pričama online. Možda ćemo vidjeti poboljšanje u borbi protiv takvih priča, ali također postoji mogućnost da će se one nastaviti širiti, ovisno o tome kako se ljudi i tehnologija budu razvijali.

 
An author is raising alarms this week after she found new books being sold on Amazon under her name — only she didn’t write them; they appear to have been generated by artificial intelligence.
Jane Friedman, who has authored multiple books and consulted about working in the writing and publishing industry, told CNN that an eagle-eyed reader looking for more of her work bought one of the fake titles on Amazon. The books had titles similar to the subjects she typically writes about, but the text read as if someone had used a generative AI model to imitate her style.