This can lead to the creation of echo chambers where you're only exposed to opinions and information that align with your existing beliefs,
I think that exploitation of users data and general current events happening in the world is what the algorithms use to create the content that can be misleading and high engaging.
This practice, also known as surveillance advertising or behavioral advertising, is deeply harmful to privacy, the flow of information, and the psychological health of social media users.
I feel that is one of the most detrimental aspects of surveillance that social media platforms can do because the user starts to become a object or commodity or form of more money for the platform.
Your lack of social transparency may cause you to lose customers
I know this seems obvious but it is important. Especially with data collection, I feel if platforms keep taking users data nonconsensual and using it for gain then users will feel that the lack of transparency is a reason for them to stop using that platform.
While some people don't mind the customized marketing approach, many consumers are becoming concerned about how much data is being collected online. By disclosing to website visitors the type of data you collect and how it will be used, you provide them with the transparency needed to build trust.
I think customized approach to marketing a product is a smart way to make money off of users, I feel that it can be an invasion of privacy as well because their using users information to gain an understanding of who they are.
n today’s networked society it is naïve and ill-conceived to think that privacy is over-rated and there is no need to be concerned about privacy if you have done nothing wrong
Unfortunately I think this is a common idea that people share when it comes to having their personal information online. They're not concerned with sharing it because they have nothing to hide. But now the platform knows you inside and out and knows how to keep you scrolling.
Social media companies operate in two-sided markets, acting as intermediaries for two groups of customers. On the one side, they interact with users to whom they offer the social media service. On the other side, they interact with advertisers to whom they sell different advertising options.
Some people might think this is backhanded for platforms to do, but if they offer their user experience for free, how else are they to make money?
users may not necessarily be familiar with how algorithms function, but they may still have an understanding that the content they meet online is filtered or that recommendations are based on their own profiles
So they don't know how algorithms work but know their content is filtered. I don't think this is necessarily bad or good. They know what they see is catered to them so they know the platform is watching. It's up to a person to realize if the platform is breaking privacy laws.
Invasion of Privacy: Social media surveillance enables organizations to gather extensive information about individuals, including their browsing habits, interests, and personal preferences. This intrusion into users' privacy raises questions about consent and control over personal data.
Users can become uncomfortable with the idea that there always being monitored, I know I feel that way especially when I'm on TikTok and I get a lot of ads about things I've been talking with friends about out loud. It makes me feel like there listening to my conversations when I'm not using the platform.
In fact, she didn’t even provide a single concrete scientific study supporting anything that she said. Telling you that there is “evidence behind this” without offering even a shred of evidence is sort of like insisting that a blind date is gorgeous without providing you with a single picture.
It's a bit annoying to see people throwing out false claims without real or any evidence behind it just so people will buy the product they are advertising. You don't even know if she actually uses castor oil at all, maybe she's just doing this once to get people to buy the product so she can make a profit off peoples negligence. But you would hope the general population would see that she is making false claims.
creators can’t sell “unlicensed medicines, herbal or homeopathic products, and those making health claims,” not verified by the United States Food and Drug Administration.
This seems like the best possible option for stopping the selling of dangerous/ineffective health/wellness "medicine's." If it's not FDA approved then it shouldn't be allowed to be sold on any sort of app. It's most likely not well researched and probably blown out or proportion or overhyped in terms of its health benefits.
Why would I be posting about it? I’m a Taurus, I don’t lie, okay?”
There's no real credibility. It seem she has no research done on the product and over hypes it to get sales.
And while it’s unlikely that applying castor oil to your skin will cause any serious issues, it won’t penetrate your body and dissolve tumors and cysts.
More data saying that there isn't enough research that castor oil can do the things that Busy Belle is claiming it will do on TikTok. TikTok profiting off of the ignorance of consumers, users, and the users advertising these products is a little dicey for me to swallow because it makes me question their morals if their allowing people to buy products that could be harmful to users while they think it will cure cancer.
TikTok Shop is a new era for the platform, one that makes it even easier for the company to monetize trends in real time instead of being outpaced by the astonishing speed of TikTok fame. But rule enforcement, context, and caution continue to lag behind.
It is refreshing to see a social media app monetize things that can be harmful to a users wellness. I personally have seen some questionable products being advertised by content creators on TikTok and wonder to myself how the app deals with this. Knowing that there is monetization of these products that are not backed by scientific research or any research in general and only have the creators claim to it is good to hear.
Castor oil, for example, has been surging in popularity this summer as a wellness hack, but it’s also an FDA-approved laxative and an ingredient in some skin care products and eye drops. Creators advertising on behalf of castor oil merchants on TikTok Shop, however, are making much broader claims, ones often not backed by any scientific evidence.
It seems that wellness creators on TikTok are using products like castor oil to make it seem better than it actually is and have a bigger, life changing, impact than what it can actually do. While castor oil isn't a bad product it's not what creators make it out to be. They are deceiving the customer to get them to buy the product so they can make a profit.
Like any major technology shift—think cash to credit, or desktop to mobile—the transition away from passwords will take time.
Good things take time is what I have always been told. I feel like there will be many factors that will affect how quickly passkeys will surpass passwords as the major authentication. Like user and industry acceptance.
Because of the risks of passwords, the tech industry has been eager to create a password-free future.
This sounds like the best course of action but how long will this take?
The server sends a one-time challenge to the device. This is a buffer of cryptographically random bytes generated by the server to prevent replay attacks. Even though WebAuthn offers various challenge-response algorithms, the Apple platform uses the AES256 standard because of the longer key length. Only the private key on the user's own terminal device is capable of generating a valid response for the challenge (i.e., for the user's login). The device generates the response -- a signature -- internally and sends it back to the server. The server then validates the response with the public key it already has. Once the response provided by the device is validated, the user is considered to be logged in.
It seems that these steps help make sure that a user's credentials remain private and secure. It's a powerful tool to enhance online security while simplifying authentication process, offering the best of both worlds: strong security and user experience.
The cryptography portion of this is that the website can confirm that the user’s device — which biometrics confirm is in their possession — has the passkey. Because of the cryptography the server never actually learns what the user’s passkey actually is. That’s the magic of public key cryptography.
Cryptography seems to be the key to providing security to users passkeys so that their passkeys aren't liable to vulnerabilities.
The next time you sign in to your Google account, you’ll be encouraged to set up a passkey for a faster, more secure login.
Convenience seems to be the goal here, however if it is more secure than regular old passwords than setting up passkeys over passwords seems like a good idea.
Passkeys can replace traditional passwords with your device’s own authentication methods. That way, you can sign in to Gmail, PayPal, or iCloud just by activating Face ID on your iPhone, your Android phone’s fingerprint sensor, or with Windows Hello on a PC. Built on WebAuthn (or Web Authentication) tech, two different keys are generated when you create a passkey: one stored by the website or service where your account is and a private key stored on the device you use to verify your identity.
It sounds like there has been a lot of thought put into making passkeys reliable and easier to deal with than normal passwords. The fact that they can work across multiple servers and have two different keys made when you create one, makes one feel secure and confident about the success and reliability of passkeys.
Google is making it easier for users to ditch passwords on their Google accounts in favor of passkeys — a fast, secure, and passwordless approach to logins that utilizes the pin, face, or fingerprint authentication built into your devices.
To me this sounds like a better way to get into your google account. You don't have to remember a password, and won't have to go through the hassle of forgetting your password and then having to remember it or create a new one to eventually forget.
Qualcomm-powered devices to perform generative AI tasks, the company is promoting its own AI Stack, a unified developer platform that allows OEMs and developers to create, test, and mass distribute their applications.
This can make AI skyrocket in success because it sounds like this AI Stack is a testing ground where they can make as many mistakes as they like, and learn from them to improve the AI capabilities.
Basically, your next smartphone, laptop, or even car may have the chipsets and systems needed to generate content at will, even with Airplane Mode turned on.
From the outside looking in this seem like a good or even cool technological advancement, but then I don't know the motivation's of the people making this so I don't know yet if I could trust how it would be used.
Newer models mean higher fees: An iPhone 14 Pro Max screen swap will cost $379. Best Buy and others charge the same prices. You might find cheaper replacements at specialty shops such as uBreakiFix. Pricing there varies by location, but in several New York stores, an iPhone XR repair can cost as little as $140.
It seems that while having a damaged screen and upgrading to a new phone is a costly purchase, that even just repairing a damaged screen is likewise.
wants to lead the way into a future where the computing that enables generative AI, like ChatGPT, doesn’t just happen on servers in data centers. It actually happens on your device.
I don't exactly know where this could lead in terms of being successful but it sounds like it could be beneficial.