Kalakshar US

Google’s earthquake warning system for Android is supposed to provide notices in time to reach safety, but that might not have happened following the quake in Turkey on February 6th. BBC investigators claim that none of the hundreds of people they talked to in three Turkish cities received an alert before the first tremor hit. Only a “limited number” got an alert for a second tremor, investigators say.

We’ve asked Google for comment. Product lead Micah Berman tells the BBC millions of people in Turkey received earthquake alerts, although the company hasn’t shared data indicating widespread notifications. Google did show a handful of social media posts from people who said they received a warning, but only one was for the first quake. Berman says he doesn’t have a “resounding answer” as to why social networks were quiet about alerts, but does note the nature of a quake and the reliability of internet access can affect the system.

The Android Earthquake Alert System uses the accelerometer (that is, motion sensing) in phones to effectively crowdsource warnings. If many phones vibrate at the same time, Google can use the collective data to find the epicenter and magnitude of the quake, automatically sending a warning to people who are likely to feel the brunt of the shaking. While there’s no more than a minute’s notice, that can be enough time to find cover or evacuate. The technology can theoretically help people in areas where conventional warnings are unavailable.

The concern is that the system might have failed during a strong (7.8-magnitude) earthquake. Even if it worked, it’s not clear how many people should and do receive warnings in cases like this, not to mention milder incidents. Without more data, it’s not certain that Android’s quake alerts are reliable substitutes for traditional warnings over radio and TV.

This article originally appeared on Engadget at https://www.engadget.com/androids-earthquake-warning-system-failed-in-turkey-according-to-the-bbc-210612253.html?src=rss 

Nearly three years ago Meta announced it was partnering with more than a dozen independent researchers to study the impact Facebook and Instagram had on the 2020 election. Both Meta and the researchers promised the project, which would rely on troves of internal data, would deliver an independent look at issues like polarization and misinformation.

Now, we have the first results of that research in the form of four peer-reviewed papers published in the journals Science and Nature. The studies offer an intriguing new look at how Facebook and Instagram’s algorithms affected what users saw in the run-up to the 2020 presidential election.

The papers are also a notable milestone for Meta. The company has at times had a strained relationship with independent researchers and been accused of “transparency theater” in its efforts to make more data available to those wishing to understand what’s happening on this platform. In a statement, Meta’s policy chief Nick Clegg said that the research suggests Facebook may not be as influential in shaping its users’ political beliefs as many believe. “The experimental studies add to a growing body of research showing there is little evidence that key features of Meta’s platforms alone cause harmful ‘affective’ polarization, or have meaningful effects on key political attitudes, beliefs or behaviors,” he wrote.

The researchers’ initial findings, however, appear to paint a more complex picture.

One study in Nature looked at the effect of so-called “echo chambers,” or when users are exposed to a large amount of “like-minded” sources. While the researchers confirm that most users in the US see a majority of content from “like-minded friends, Pages and groups,” they note all of it isn’t explicitly political or news-related. They also found that decreasing the amount of “like-minded” content reduced engagement, but didn’t measurably change user’s beliefs or attitudes.

While the authors note the results don’t account for the “cumulative effects” years of social media use may have had on their subjects, they do suggest the effects of echo chambers are often mischaracterized.

Another study in Nature looked at the effect of chronological feeds compared with algorithmically-generated ones. That issue gained particular prominence in 2021, thanks to revelations from whistleblower Frances Haugen, who has advocated for a return to chronological feeds. Unsurprisingly, the researchers concluded that Facebook and Instagram’s algorithmic feeds “strongly influenced users’ experiences.”

“The Chronological Feed dramatically reduced the amount of time users spent on the platform, reduced how much users engaged with content when they were on the platform, and altered the mix of content they were served,” the authors write. “Users saw more content from ideologically moderate friends and sources with mixed audiences; more political content; more content from untrustworthy sources; and less content classified as uncivil or containing slur words than they would have on the Algorithmic Feed.”

At the same time, the researchers say that a chronological feed “did not cause detectable changes in downstream political attitudes, knowledge, or offline behavior.”

Likewise, another study, also in Science, on the effects of reshared content in the run-up to the 2020 election found that removing reshared content “substantially decreases the amount of political news, including content from untrustworthy sources” but didn’t “significantly affect political polarization or any measure of individual-level political attitudes.’

Finally, researchers analyzed the political news stories that appeared in users’ feeds in the context of whether they were liberal or conservative. They concluded that Facebook is “substantially segregated ideologically” but that “ideological segregation manifests far more in content posted by Pages and Groups than in content posted by friends.” They also found conservative users were far more likely to see content from “untrustworthy” sources, as well as articles rated false by the company’s third-party fact checkers.

The researchers said the results were a “manifestation of how Pages and Groups provide a very powerful curation and dissemination machine that is used especially effectively by sources with predominantly conservative audiences.”

While some of the findings look good for Meta, which has long argued that political content is only a small minority of what most users see, one of the most notable takeaways from the research is that there aren’t obvious solutions for addressing the polarization that does on social media. “The results of these experiments do not show that the platforms are not the problem, but they show that they are not the solution,” University of Konstanz’ David Garcia, who was part of the research team, told Science.

This article originally appeared on Engadget at https://www.engadget.com/new-research-shows-how-metas-algorithms-shaped-users-2020-election-feeds-213002211.html?src=rss 

Google’s anti-stalking measures are rolling out. The company’s unknown tracker alerts and other safety measures, announced at Google I/O in May, should start appearing on Android 6.0+ devices beginning today. The initiative aims to reduce the unfortunate rise in digital stalking that materialized soon after Apple’s AirTag launch in 2021.

Android’s unknown tracker alerts tell you if an unknown Bluetooth tracker is traveling with you but not its owner. If your Android phone notifies you about a discovered tracking accessory, you can tap on the alert to learn more about it, including a map of where it traveled with you and (in some cases) a serial number and info about the device’s owner. You can also tap a “Play sound” option to make the accessory chirp to help you locate it. If it turns out to be something suspicious, it will provide instructions on deactivating it so its owner will no longer receive updates. (In the case of AirTag, that means twisting its top off and removing its battery.)

The Android rollout also allows you to manually scan for nearby trackers rather than waiting for an alert. Once your phone receives the update, navigate to Settings > Safety & Emergency > Unknown Tracker Alerts, and select the “Scan now” button. Google says the manual search only takes about ten seconds, and if it finds one, you’ll see the same options as if you received an automatic alert.

The new feature is the fruit of Google and Apple partnering to address concerns about unwanted tracker stalking. In addition, Google announced today that its Find My Device network (equivalent to Apple’s Find My), also announced at Google I/O, is delayed. Google decided to wait for Apple to implement its full unknown tracking protections into iOS before rolling out the new feature.

Note that Google’s anti-stalking measures may reduce the effectiveness of following tracked stolen items on a map since enterprising thieves can soon quickly discover hidden trackers, no matter which phone they use. However, it’s understandable that reducing stalking would override that concern in Google and Apple’s security balancing act.

This article originally appeared on Engadget at https://www.engadget.com/google-rolls-out-anti-stalking-measures-for-airtag-and-other-bluetooth-trackers-194936293.html?src=rss