wt:social

There have been multiple attempts to offer an alternative to Facebook and I have tried and continue to use several (Diaspora, MeWe). The network effect (people stay where there are other people) makes it very difficult to gain traction. Now, Jimmy Wales, Wikipedia founder, is going to give it a try. The new service is called wt:social.

wt:social will differ from Facebook (and Twitter) mostly in how it is funded and how it is funded has consequences for how it works. Facebook and Twitter are funded by targeted ads and make use of user data to sell these ads. Wales intends to fund wt:social using the same kind of contribution model he used with Wikipedia.

Because wt:social has been relatively possible, Wales has had to institute a wait list approach for those not wanting to make an immediate contribution. I admit to being one of these individuals. I contribute to several social media sites, but the $100 a year subscription model was too much for me at this point. I would have contributed a lesser amount and I might eventually contribute the $100, but I want to see if the site can attract a substantial amount of activity before it would be worth this amount to me.

wt:social is built on an a previous news effort that never really gained much traction. It does retain some features of the effort and allows participants to create and “subwikis” that can be followed as an addition to following the posts from specific friends. I created a wiki – K12 Edtech – to see how this might work. Individuals interested in this topic who join wt:social are encouraged to add this “group” and to contribute. I intend to see the wiki with links top content I have written elsewhere and maybe some original content so there is initially something there to see. If nothing develops in a month or so, I will probably just delete the topic. Give it a look if interested.

If you are interested in wt:social and want to spend some time to see how it develops, my wait time was about a week.

If you are unhappy with Facebook or Twitter this may offer an alternative and a big name in the tech community may be able to pull off creating an option. How satisfied you are will depend on whether the new offering can attract users and what you found objectionable with other existing services. The elimination of the business model based on harvesting personal information to drive ads could be your objection. If you want to leave Facebook because of what you read there, it is hard to predict if things will improve with a different service. wt:social does allow control over acquaintances and wiki sources so your feed may end up more to your liking.

Loading

Kialo-Edu

I have written previously about my own experiences hosting an online argument/debate using Kialo.com. https://learningaloud.com/blog/2018/05/22/kialo-structured-argumentation].

Kialo organizes the pro and con positions on a stated issue. Others are invited to add to the sample pro and con statements the host uses to initiate the discussion and to respond with pro and con statements to the statements made by others. The developing argument is visually structured as hierarchically organized statements and eventually participants are encouraged to vote on the persuasiveness of component components of the discussion.

A couple of visuals from my own effort may help communicate what this looks like. The first shows the interface for contributing and examining the discussion. The second a visualization of a mature discussion.

Kialo has now spun off a version of its original effort no focused on classroom use [Kialo-Edu.com – https://www.kialo-edu.com. Kialo was always used in classrooms, but this new version allows some separation. 

If this is at all interesting, I would encourage your attention to my original description of how the online tool works. Kialo offers content describing the intent of its new service for classrooms [https://www.kialo-edu.com/about] and offers additional background including tutorials, examples, and suggestions for application [https://support.kialo-edu.com/hc/en-us/articles/360035225932-Try-Out-Kialo-in-Five-Simple-Steps-High-School-Classrooms].

Loading

Brave is now available for iOS – this is big

I have been a supporter of the Brave browser and ecosystem since I first tried it months ago. Simply put, the Brave ecosystem is intended to protect user privacy and still allow a way for content creators and online service providers to generate revenue to support their effort and infrastructures. The Brave browser allows users to take several different actions:

  • Block ads, cookies, and scripts
  • View Brave screened and delivered ads and be compensated for being open to this content
  • Compensate content creators and service providers

Which of these capabilities is implemented is under user control. I do think it appropriate that if users block ads they should consider the reality that they are also accepting the work of others without compensation or at a minimum rejecting the assumption producers made when engaging in the creative process. So, I promote Brave as way to receive compensation AND compensate creators without abandoning privacy.

When I started with Brave, there was no opportunity for users of the browser to receive compensation by viewing selected ads. I put in $50 as a way to explore the full system as it developed. The availability of revenue for viewing Brave controlled ads was not available at that time. I did take advantage of the compensation opportunity when it became available, but must say that even at the amount of time I spent online I was still paying most of my commitment out of pocket. Not a big deal, but I do understand how the very frugal might see this as a problem.

One of the issues I had with Brave was that I could use Brave on all of the various devices I use, but the revenue generating opportunity was only available on my computers (not my phone or tablets). For many users, the phone and tablet may be their only devices or represent the vast proportion of the time they spend online. I think this was even true for me.

Today, Brave has announced that it now makes available the opportunity of iOS users to receive compensation for their attention. The multiple options I describe above are easy to set up.

I describe my experiences with Brave in multiple posts you can locate by using the search box on this site.

I think Brave will influence what happens online. My concern is that other players who could have easily implemented similar opportunities will now respond with similar programs limiting the commitment of users to Brave. This is how business seems to go, but it does seem unfair that innovation is so often mimicked leaving little for those who forced advancement.

Loading

Can AI identify bias in media

Nowhere News is a recent news service attempting to use artificial intelligence to identify bias in news. The service accesses a large number of news services and identifies popular stories of the day. The service than uses the content from multiple services to create a neutral account and also generates a right-wing and a left-wing version (or positive and negative view if more appropriate). The developers have weighted the sites they access by reputation for accuracy and do review and edit the generated summaries before publishing. 

I read multiple descriptions of Nowhere News to try to understand more about what the AI is doing [ TechCrunch, Singularity Hub, Vice]. Services that summarize web content have been around for several years. One approach might involve summarizing multiple accounts from news services known to have right, left, and neutral biases. This does not seem to be what is happening here. As I understand AI, you input many signals and identify a characteristic of the source (in this case, right, neutral, and left) and the system learns how to use the signals to more and more accurately predict the designated category. I am not certain this appropriately summarizes what has been done here.

However generated, the three versions of a story generalized from multiple sources would seem to have some educational value. Just reading the three summaries offers readers insight into what bias means. [see Common Sense Media comment on educational potential].

At present the Knowhere News site is free and I would assume would eventually need to find some way to monetize. If you enroll as a user, you receive emails with story summarizes. You can also just visit the site and read the stories summarized for a given day.

This service is interesting and useful. I doubt it could be regarded as a solution to the fake news crisis.  First, I don’t see brief summaries the equivalent of reading long-form news stories. Knowhere does provide links to multiple sources, but often not to sources I would read. I am not clear how major news sources with some version of a pay to read model regard content being used in this way. Second and as acknowledged by Knowhere, there is a difference between bias (spin) and quality. See my previous post.

Loading