Beefing up livestock disaster assistance | Farm & Ranch | willistonherald.com – Williston Daily Herald

Posted on by

Country

United States of AmericaUS Virgin IslandsUnited States Minor Outlying IslandsCanadaMexico, United Mexican StatesBahamas, Commonwealth of theCuba, Republic ofDominican RepublicHaiti, Republic ofJamaicaAfghanistanAlbania, People's Socialist Republic ofAlgeria, People's Democratic Republic ofAmerican SamoaAndorra, Principality ofAngola, Republic ofAnguillaAntarctica (the territory South of 60 deg S)Antigua and BarbudaArgentina, Argentine RepublicArmeniaArubaAustralia, Commonwealth ofAustria, Republic ofAzerbaijan, Republic ofBahrain, Kingdom ofBangladesh, People's Republic ofBarbadosBelarusBelgium, Kingdom ofBelizeBenin, People's Republic ofBermudaBhutan, Kingdom ofBolivia, Republic ofBosnia and HerzegovinaBotswana, Republic ofBouvet Island (Bouvetoya)Brazil, Federative Republic ofBritish Indian Ocean Territory (Chagos Archipelago)British Virgin IslandsBrunei DarussalamBulgaria, People's Republic ofBurkina FasoBurundi, Republic ofCambodia, Kingdom ofCameroon, United Republic ofCape Verde, Republic ofCayman IslandsCentral African RepublicChad, Republic ofChile, Republic ofChina, People's Republic ofChristmas IslandCocos (Keeling) IslandsColombia, Republic ofComoros, Union of theCongo, Democratic Republic ofCongo, People's Republic ofCook IslandsCosta Rica, Republic ofCote D'Ivoire, Ivory Coast, Republic of theCyprus, Republic ofCzech RepublicDenmark, Kingdom ofDjibouti, Republic ofDominica, Commonwealth ofEcuador, Republic ofEgypt, Arab Republic ofEl Salvador, Republic ofEquatorial Guinea, Republic ofEritreaEstoniaEthiopiaFaeroe IslandsFalkland Islands (Malvinas)Fiji, Republic of the Fiji IslandsFinland, Republic ofFrance, French RepublicFrench GuianaFrench PolynesiaFrench Southern TerritoriesGabon, Gabonese RepublicGambia, Republic of theGeorgiaGermanyGhana, Republic ofGibraltarGreece, Hellenic RepublicGreenlandGrenadaGuadaloupeGuamGuatemala, Republic ofGuinea, RevolutionaryPeople's Rep'c ofGuinea-Bissau, Republic ofGuyana, Republic ofHeard and McDonald IslandsHoly See (Vatican City State)Honduras, Republic ofHong Kong, Special Administrative Region of ChinaHrvatska (Croatia)Hungary, Hungarian People's RepublicIceland, Republic ofIndia, Republic ofIndonesia, Republic ofIran, Islamic Republic ofIraq, Republic ofIrelandIsrael, State ofItaly, Italian RepublicJapanJordan, Hashemite Kingdom ofKazakhstan, Republic ofKenya, Republic ofKiribati, Republic ofKorea, Democratic People's Republic ofKorea, Republic ofKuwait, State ofKyrgyz RepublicLao People's Democratic RepublicLatviaLebanon, Lebanese RepublicLesotho, Kingdom ofLiberia, Republic ofLibyan Arab JamahiriyaLiechtenstein, Principality ofLithuaniaLuxembourg, Grand Duchy ofMacao, Special Administrative Region of ChinaMacedonia, the former Yugoslav Republic ofMadagascar, Republic ofMalawi, Republic ofMalaysiaMaldives, Republic ofMali, Republic ofMalta, Republic ofMarshall IslandsMartiniqueMauritania, Islamic Republic ofMauritiusMayotteMicronesia, Federated States ofMoldova, Republic ofMonaco, Principality ofMongolia, Mongolian People's RepublicMontserratMorocco, Kingdom ofMozambique, People's Republic ofMyanmarNamibiaNauru, Republic ofNepal, Kingdom ofNetherlands AntillesNetherlands, Kingdom of theNew CaledoniaNew ZealandNicaragua, Republic ofNiger, Republic of theNigeria, Federal Republic ofNiue, Republic ofNorfolk IslandNorthern Mariana IslandsNorway, Kingdom ofOman, Sultanate ofPakistan, Islamic Republic ofPalauPalestinian Territory, OccupiedPanama, Republic ofPapua New GuineaParaguay, Republic ofPeru, Republic ofPhilippines, Republic of thePitcairn IslandPoland, Polish People's RepublicPortugal, Portuguese RepublicPuerto RicoQatar, State ofReunionRomania, Socialist Republic ofRussian FederationRwanda, Rwandese RepublicSamoa, Independent State ofSan Marino, Republic ofSao Tome and Principe, Democratic Republic ofSaudi Arabia, Kingdom ofSenegal, Republic ofSerbia and MontenegroSeychelles, Republic ofSierra Leone, Republic ofSingapore, Republic ofSlovakia (Slovak Republic)SloveniaSolomon IslandsSomalia, Somali RepublicSouth Africa, Republic ofSouth Georgia and the South Sandwich IslandsSpain, Spanish StateSri Lanka, Democratic Socialist Republic ofSt. HelenaSt. Kitts and NevisSt. LuciaSt. Pierre and MiquelonSt. Vincent and the GrenadinesSudan, Democratic Republic of theSuriname, Republic ofSvalbard & Jan Mayen IslandsSwaziland, Kingdom ofSweden, Kingdom ofSwitzerland, Swiss ConfederationSyrian Arab RepublicTaiwan, Province of ChinaTajikistanTanzania, United Republic ofThailand, Kingdom ofTimor-Leste, Democratic Republic ofTogo, Togolese RepublicTokelau (Tokelau Islands)Tonga, Kingdom ofTrinidad and Tobago, Republic ofTunisia, Republic ofTurkey, Republic ofTurkmenistanTurks and Caicos IslandsTuvaluUganda, Republic ofUkraineUnited Arab EmiratesUnited Kingdom of Great Britain & N. IrelandUruguay, Eastern Republic ofUzbekistanVanuatuVenezuela, Bolivarian Republic ofViet Nam, Socialist Republic ofWallis and Futuna IslandsWestern SaharaYemenZambia, Republic ofZimbabwe

Read this article:

Beefing up livestock disaster assistance | Farm & Ranch | willistonherald.com - Williston Daily Herald

OPINION: The new free speech bullies – The Richmond Observer

Posted on by

As an academic dean of library services for the past 40 years, I think I have a good eye for what constitutes censorship. Cancel culture, a new term for an old and deadly form of silencing your enemies has recently shown its ugly face and has unmistakably assumed the role of free speech bullies. Not since the McCarthy Era have we seen such proscription of speech, and it appears to be unrelenting. The eagerness with which these new speech bullies seek to prohibit ideas is now ubiquitous, and the desire to cancel scores of individuals from Washington State to, well, the heart of the reddest of Red States, Rock Hill, South Carolina, where I live, is raging.

Cancel culture isnt just tendentious; its also malicious. Dr. Seusss books now struggle to remain in the reading canon for children. Dozens of our great writers, including Twain, Shakespeare, Carlyle, and medieval culture and literature, have been canceled. More authors are on the cancel culture chopping block. I find this form of censorship appalling. We all should.

Sadly, this isnt just a group of louche-minded malcontents, either. With no fanfare, Amazon has decided to withdraw from selling any books it deems hate speech, the first such book being one that dares to question sex reassignment among minors. Cancel culture is so widespread it has its talons even in Congress.

What disturbs most, however, is these new free speech bullies are everywhere. Sure, you might expect to see them and their work in places like Los Angeles, California, Portland, Oregon, or Antifa strongholds like Seattle, Washington. But in the heart of conservative politics in South Carolina?

Sadly, yes. Forty-five days from my retirement, I became a victim of cancel culture for a two-part article I wrote for a professional library magazine in March 2020. My crimes were threefold: daring to call our then plague the Wuhan Virus, a phrase nearly every media in the country had used or was still using; repeating an Obama Administration wordplay (the Kung-Flu), and pointing out East-West culture differences. The second part never saw the light of day.

A maelstrom of maledictions followed, first from the magazine I had written for, for the last 15 years (ironically called Against the Grain). Not only had the magazine given me my own column, but it had in this instance showcased part one on its front cover as one to read. After less than a dozen vocal subscribers complained it to be racist, the magazine unilaterally pulled the piece and apologized for its appearance. It didnt end there. The American Library Association and the Asian Pacific Library Association also chimed in. Blood was in the water, and they wanted their part of the prized flesh.

Next, my university employer of 21 years piled on. My articles were censored from our faculty digital archive, and I was paraded before my peers as racist and xenophobic in an email from my provost. She later recommended reading materials for my reeducation. All this took place at Winthrop University, a state institution of about 5,500 students in the Palmetto State, a state that elected Republicans in every contested seat in the 2020 elections.

Cancel culture usually ends badly for the victim, including loss of reputation, standing, even employment. While I have lost some reputation in my professional circles, my story ended well. I was able, thanks to some prominent friends (among them my congressman and state senator), my cancel culture moment ended with a written apology from the provost for her overreach sent campus-wide, another apology from the Interim president, and reinstatement of my articles to our digital commons.

At the very least, the First Amendment allows ideas to fight it out in the marketplace of ideas. Some ideas will appeal, others will not, but none are to be silenced from the get-go by someone who deems them unworthy by his or her private definition of the term. The First Amendment isnt a weapon, or it isnt supposed to be, especially by an institution of higher learning.

If all of this sounds hyperbolic to you, overblown in a kind of hysterical way, just remember how these things work. If cancel culture can erase my right to free speech in one of the countrys reddest states, it can also come for yours. If men and women of good spirit do nothing, you can count on cancel culture coming for your free speech as well.

I hope for all our sakes; we survive this onslaught.

Mark Y. Herring is professor emeritus, dean of library services from Winthrop University. Herring spent 42 years as dean or director in academic libraries in Tennessee, Oklahoma and South Carolina. He was most recently appointed by Gov. Henry McMaster to the South Carolina State Library Board. He resides with his wife, Carol, in Rock Hill. Republished from the Carolina Journal.

Read the original post:

OPINION: The new free speech bullies - The Richmond Observer

Are Censures of Politicians a Form of Free Speech or a Threat to It? – The New York Times

Posted on by

Judge Davis acknowledged that the board had also imposed some punishments more concrete than a reprimand, like making Mr. Wilson ineligible for reimbursement for college-related travel. Those additional penalties, the judge wrote, did not violate his First Amendment rights.

Mr. Wilsons lawyers told the justices that the power to censure must have limits. Elected bodies can censure their members for what they say during the lawmaking process, they wrote, and for conduct that is not protected by the First Amendment. But outside the official realm, they wrote, the First Amendment forbids a government bodys official punishment of a speaker for merely expressing disagreement with a political majority.

Those may appear to be fine distinctions. Mr. Wilsons brief in the case, Houston Community College System v. Wilson, No. 20-804, gave examples to illustrate how they would work outside the legislative process.

A censure would be permissible for illegal marijuana use, for example, but not for statements supporting the legalization of marijuana use, the brief said. Likewise, a censure would be permissible for slander, but not for statements that merely criticize.

The full Fifth Circuit deadlocked on whether to rehear the case, by an 8-to-8 vote. Dissenting from the decision to deny further review, Judge Edith H. Jones said the panels First Amendment analysis was backward. The boards censure was itself speech worthy of protection, she wrote, particularly in a polarized era.

Given the increasing discord in society and governmental bodies, the attempts of each side in these disputes to get a leg up on the other, and the ready availability of weapons of mass communication with which each side can tar the other, the panels decision is the harbinger of future lawsuits, Judge Jones wrote. It weaponizes any gadfly in a legislative body.

Political infighting of this sort, she wrote, should not be dignified with a false veneer of constitutional protection and has no place in the federal courts.

Read the rest here:

Are Censures of Politicians a Form of Free Speech or a Threat to It? - The New York Times

Joe Biden Has Officially Ended a 20-Year War – Free Speech TV

Posted on by

The longest war in United States history has finally ended after nearly twenty years. The Associated Press has reported that the final US troops have left Afghanistan and now President Biden and Secretary of State Antony Blinken have reiterated this. Much of the coverage has been negative in the past few weeks given the Talibans speedy takeover and the attack outside the Kabul airport on Thursday that took upwards of 200 lives. However, exiting Afghanistan was something that had to be done and Joe Biden followed through on what George Bush, Barack Obama, and Donald Trump were unable to. The alternative was remaining in the country for five, ten, twenty or even a hundred years as some have suggested and that just wasnt going to be a tenable solution. Biden is set to address the nation today and he will mention there will be continued efforts to get American citizens and Afghan allies out of the country if they want to leave. In the short term, many will see the tumultuous exit of US personnel as a failure, but zooming out, history is likely to view Bidens decision kindly.

--

The David Pakman Show is a news and political talk program, known for its controversial interviews with political and religious extremists, liberal and conservative politicians, and other guests.

Missed an episode? Check out David Pakman on our Youtube Channel anytime or visit the show page for the latest clips.

#FreeSpeechTV is one of the last standing national, independent news networks committed to advancing progressive social change.

#FSTV is available on Dish, DirectTV, AppleTV, Roku, Sling and online at freespeech.org

Afghanistan Antony Blinken Associated Press David Pakman Joe Biden The David Pakman Show United States War

See the original post here:

Joe Biden Has Officially Ended a 20-Year War - Free Speech TV

War-Thirsty Media Demanding Another War – Free Speech TV

Posted on by

The United States has officially ended the longest war in its history with the final troops clearing out of Afghanistan. President Biden addressed the nation to explain his decision to end the war and posed the following question to his critics: to those asking for a third decade of war in Afghanistan, I ask, What is the vital national interest? Even though polling data has shown for a long time that its time for America to get out of the Middle East, members of the media havent seemed so pleased with Bidens decision. White House Press Secretary Jen Psaki held a press conference yesterday and one reporter asked her, does the president envision any situation in which he might deploy a large amount of US troops abroad under his presidency? The fact that the default solution to conflict for this reporter is extensive military presence goes to show there needs to be a paradigm shift when it comes to US foreign policy. Another reporter told Psaki that Biden seemed angry in his speech to the American public, asking whos he mad at? This pushback from the media was predictable, as conflicts tend to drive ratings. Now, were witnessing the media try to get the last play it can out of the twenty-year war in Afghanistan before having to move on to the next topic.

--

The David Pakman Show is a news and political talk program, known for its controversial interviews with political and religious extremists, liberal and conservative politicians, and other guests.

Missed an episode? Check out David Pakman on our Youtube Channel anytime or visit the show page for the latest clips.

#FreeSpeechTV is one of the last standing national, independent news networks committed to advancing progressive social change.

#FSTV is available on Dish, DirectTV, AppleTV, Roku, Sling and online at freespeech.org

Afghanistan David Pakman Jen Psaki Joe Biden Media National Security Taliban The David Pakman Show United States War

Here is the original post:

War-Thirsty Media Demanding Another War - Free Speech TV

New Texas Abortion Law Likely to Unleash a Torrent of Lawsuits Against Online Education, Advocacy and Other Speech – EFF

Posted on by

In addition to the drastic restrictions it places on a womans reproductive and medical care rights, the new Texas abortion law, SB8, will have devastating effects on online speech.

The law creates a cadre of bounty hunters who can use the courts to punish and silence anyone whose online advocacy, education, and other speech about abortion draws their ire. It will undoubtedly lead to a torrent of private lawsuits against online speakers who publish information about abortion rights and access in Texas, with little regard for the merits of those lawsuits or the First Amendment protections accorded to the speech. Individuals and organizations providing basic educational resources, sharing information, identifying locations of clinics, arranging rides and escorts, fundraising to support reproductive rights, or simply encouraging women to consider all their optionsnow have to consider the risk that they might be sued for merely speaking. The result will be a chilling effect on speech and a litigation cudgel that will be used to silence those who seek to give women truthful information about their reproductive options.

We will quickly see the emergence of anti-choice trolls: lawyers and plaintiffs dedicated to using the courts to extort money from a wide variety of speakers supporting reproductive rights.

SB8, also known as the Texas Heartbeat Act, encourages private persons to file lawsuits against anyone who knowingly engages in conduct that aids or abets the performance or inducement of an abortion. It doesnt matter whether that person knew or should have known that the abortion would be performed or induced in violation of the law, that is, the laws new and broadly expansive definition of illegal abortion. And you can be liable even if you simply intend to help, regardless, apparently, of whether an illegal abortion actually resulted from your assistance.

And although you may defend a lawsuit if you believed the doctor performing the abortion complied with the law, it is really hard to do so. You must prove that you conducted a reasonable investigation, and as a result reasonably believed that the doctor was following the law. Thats a lot to do before you simply post something to the internet, and of course you will probably have to hire a lawyer to help you do it.

SB8 is a bounty law: it doesnt just allow these lawsuits, it provides a significant financial incentive to file them. It guarantees that a person who files and wins such a lawsuit will receive at least $10,000 for each abortion that the speech aided or abetted, plus their costs and attorneys fees. At the same time, SB8 may often shield these bounty hunters from having to pay the defendants legal costs should they lose. This removes a key financial disincentive they might have had against bringing meritless lawsuits.

Moreover, lawsuits may be filed up to six years after the purported aiding and abetting occurred. And the law allows for retroactive liability: you can be liable even if your aiding and abetting conduct was legal when you did it, if a later court decision changes the rules. Together this creates a ticking time bomb for anyone who dares to say anything that educates the public about, or even discusses, abortion online.

Given this legal structure, and the laws vast application, there is no doubt that we will quickly see the emergence of anti-choice trolls: lawyers and plaintiffs dedicated to using the courts to extort money from a wide variety of speakers supporting reproductive rights.

And unfortunately, its not clear when speech encouraging someone to or instructing them how to commit a crime rises to the level of aiding and abetting unprotected by the First Amendment. Under the leading case on the issue, it is a fact-intensive analysis, which means that defending the case on First amendment grounds may be arduous and expensive.

The result of all of this is the classic chilling effect: many would-be speakers will choose not to speak at all for fear of having to defend even the meritless lawsuits that SB8 encourages. And many speakers will choose to take down their speech if merely threatened with a lawsuit, rather than risk the laws penalties if they lose or take on the burdens of a fact-intensive case even if they were likely to win it.

The law does include an empty clause providing that it may not be construed to impose liability on any speech or conduct protected by the First Amendment of the United States Constitution, as made applicable to the states through the United States Supreme Courts interpretation of the Fourteenth Amendment of the United States Constitution. While that sounds nice, it offers no real protectionyou can already raise the First Amendment in any case, and you dont need the Texas legislature to give you permission. Rather, that clause is included to try to insulate the law from a facial First Amendment challengea challenge to the mere existence of the law rather than its use against a specific person. In other words, the drafters are hoping to ensure that, even if the law is unconstitutionalwhich it iseach individual plaintiff will have to raise the First Amendment issues on their own, and bear the exorbitant costsboth financial and otherwiseof having to defend the lawsuit in the first place.

One existing free speech bulwark47 U.S.C. 230 (Section 230)will provide some protection here, at least for the online intermediaries upon which many speakers depend. Section 230 immunizes online intermediaries from state law liability arising from the speech of their users, so it provides a way for online platforms and other services to get early dismissals of lawsuits against them based on their hosting of user speech. So although a user will still have to fully defend a lawsuit arising, for example, from posting clinic hours online, the platform they used to share that information will not. That is important, because without that protection, many platforms would preemptively take down abortion-related speech for fear of having to defend these lawsuits themselves. As a result, even a strong-willed abortion advocate willing to risk the burdens of litigation in order to defend their right to speak will find their speech limited if weak-kneed platforms refuse to publish it. This is exactly the way Section 230 is designed to work: to reduce the likelihood that platforms will censor in order to protect themselves from legal liability, and to enable speakers to make their own decisions about what to say and what risks to bear with their speech.

But a powerful and dangerous chilling effect remains for users. Texass anti-abortion law is an attack on many fundamental rights, including the First Amendment rights to advocate for abortion rights, to provide basic educational information, and to counsel those considering reproductive decisions. We will keep a close eye on the lawsuits the law spurs and the chilling effects that accompany them. If you experience such censorship, please contact info@eff.org.

Read more from the original source:

New Texas Abortion Law Likely to Unleash a Torrent of Lawsuits Against Online Education, Advocacy and Other Speech - EFF

Stopping online hate speech is hard. New research teaches machines to find white nationalist content – The Star Online

Posted on by

Mitigating the impact of online extremism has proven a complicated task for companies that want to protect free expression.

Social media companies have struggled to moderate hate speech and adapt to changes in how white supremacists spread their views on digital platforms. Libby Hemphill, an associate professor at the University of Michigan School of Information, believes machine learning technology might provide an answer.

We know that white supremacists and other types of extremists use social media to talk to each other, to recruit, to try to get their message to go mainstream, Hemphill said. The challenge has been that the platforms havent really stepped up to fight hate on their platforms.

Through a partnership with the Anti-Defamation League, Hemphill set out to teach algorithms to distinguish white supremacist and extremist speech from the typical conversations people are having on social media. Turns out, extremist groups are pretty good at hiding in plain sight but algorithms can become even better at finding them.

We cant do content moderation without some machine assistance, Hemphill said. Theres just too much content.

Hemphill started by collecting a sample of 275,000 blog posts from Stormfront, a white nationalist website. The data was fed to algorithms used to study the sentence structure of posts, detect specific phrases and flag recurring topics.

The goal was to train a machine to identify toxic language using the Stormfront conversations as a model. Algorithms compared the Stormfront data to 755,000 Twitter posts from users affiliated with the alt-right movement and another set of 510,000 Reddit posts collected from general users.

The results are still being compiled. Hemphill is hoping to unveil a public tool later this fall.

Big tech companies like Facebook and Twitter have been accused of stifling free speech by removing users who violate community guidelines prohibiting hate speech. Offending posts are identified by algorithms trained to detect hate speech and through reports from users.

However, advocacy organisations arent satisfied with enforcement standards.

The Center to Counter Digital Hate found the top five social media companies took no action on 84% of anti-semitic posts reported to them. CCDH, a non-profit group in the United States and the United Kingdom, flagged 714 posts through the platforms user reporting tools. The anti-semitic posts were viewed up to seven million times.

Platforms must aggressively remedy their moderation systems which have been proven to be insufficient, CCDH CEO Imran Ahmed wrote in a study announcing the groups findings.

Steps to ban white nationalist content also inspired the rise of new platforms with more relaxed content standards. Gab, MeWe and Parler purport to champion free speech but have been criticised as havens for extremists.

Gab CEO Andrew Torba promotes his website as the only place you can criticise groups like the American Jewish Congress and the ADL in emails to Gabs user base.

Hemphill said theres significant conflict revolving around what constitutes hate speech and what social platforms should do about it. She also acknowledged concerns that machines can make mistakes and unfairly punish users.

The challenge is that we as a community dont share a set of values, Hemphill said. We disagree about what is hateful and what ought to be permissible. One of the things that I would like to see come out of work like this is more explicit discussions about what our values are and what is okay with us and what isnt. Then we can worry about what we ought to teach machines.

Finding the line can be tricky. Accurately identifying nuanced racial stereotypes and microaggressions is harder than finding slurs, Hemphill said. Theres also a large number of posts containing meme images and videos that are harder to accurately catalogue.

Stormfront was used as a baseline in Hemphills research because the group openly identifies as a forum for white nationalists. Alt-right Twitter users were selected from a study commissioned by the Centre for American Progress.

Beyond the use of racial slurs and other kinds of toxic language, Hemphill said subtle differences were found between white nationalists and the average internet user. For example, white nationalists swear less often, possibly a tactic to appear more palatable to mainstream audiences.

They are sort of politely hateful, Hemphill said. If youve spent any time on the Internet at all, you know that its a pretty profane place, but white supremacists are not profane. They are marked by what they dont do as well.

Hate speech makes up a relatively small amount of content on the Internet, Hemphill said, though it makes a large impact on whoever sees it. She plans to collect more data from smaller websites like Gab, 4chan and Parler to continue teaching algorithms to identify hate speech.

Ultimately, the goal is to encourage social media companies to create inclusive spaces for discussion.

Its OK to be freaked out about big tech, and its OK to be freaked out about academic researchers and what we may be doing, Hemphill said. I think the more this conversation happens in the open and the more data is shared among folks who are trying to understand how these decisions get made, the better, more just decisions about what is permissible will come from that openness. mlive.com/Tribune News Service

Read the original:

Stopping online hate speech is hard. New research teaches machines to find white nationalist content - The Star Online

[COMMENTARY] Twitter Is Not a Town Square; We Should Stop Treating It Like One – HillReporter.com

Posted on by

Twitter recently came under severe pressure for allowing the Taliban to keep their account on its platform. By way of contrast, the company decided to suspend Republican Representative Marjorie Taylor Greene for repeatedly tweeting that COVID vaccines are ineffective. In the eyes of many Americans, Twitter should have done the exact opposite. For my part, I cannot help but think that Twitter is within its right to behave as it did.

Since 2019, I have been teaching social media ethics to the aspiring computer scientists of Silicon Valley. When my students ask me about the extent of their right to free speech on social media, my answer is quite radical: they do not have a right to freedom of expression on such platforms. This is because Twitter is not a town square, and we should stop treating it like one.

Traditionally, the language of free speech is used to protect citizens from censorship when government actors abuse their power and stifle dissent. In recent years, however, social media critics have increasingly used this language to describe a very different relationship: that which exists between powerful private actors and users who generate content on their platforms.

From a legal point of view, the distinction between public and private matters. Citizens right to free speech in public spaces does not immediately translate into a right to say what they please in privately-owned spaces. By way of example, members of the public do not have a right to publish what they want in the newspaper of their choice. That the Wall Street Journal will not publish my left-wing op-eds might irk me, but this does not give me a right to demand it does so. If we conceive of social media platforms as publishers, they, therefore, have a right to control what content circulates on their platform. Indeed, the comparison between publishers and social media platforms is not far-fetched: just like editors of newspapers decide what goes on the front page, Twitters algorithms determine what users see first in their feed when they log into their account.

Of course, we might reject the publisher analogy and envision social media platforms as virtual spaces which are part of the new online public sphere. This does not make them town squares, neither literally nor metaphorically. Again, such spaces are privately owned, which means that they are more akin to public accommodations, that is, private facilities which are used by the public at large such as restaurants and clubs.

Public accommodations are subject to anti-discrimination law. For instance, a restaurant owner cannot refuse service to customers on the grounds that they are differently-abled or practice a particular religion. Yet, anti-discrimination legislation targeted at public accommodations does not extend to viewpoint discrimination. For instance, it would be quite strange for a white supremacist to argue that she is the victim of discrimination because her universitys Anti-Racist League denies her membership on the grounds of her political views. If Twitter is a public accommodation, then it might similarly have a right to exclude viewpoints that run contrary to its executives values.

In my view, abusing the language of free speech prevents us from having a fruitful democratic debate on the right to exclude viewpoints from private spaces. Accepting to engage in such debate does not mean that we have to grant tech companies unlimited powers. If we the people dislike the fact that social media platforms currently regulate content as they please, we can change anti-discrimination law and collectively decide which perspectives they should be obligated to include. From a philosophical point of view, however, shouting free speech on a crowded social media platform does not accomplish anything; it simply blurs the lines between the public and the private.

Rejecting the town square model of Twitter is not merely a matter of philosophical clarity, but also of democratic power. In fact, my suggestion is to conceive of social media firms as private spaces that can be regulated by the government. Yet, people who shout free speech are under the mistaken impression that Twitter is the government. This comes at a great cost. If Twitter is our tyrant, then the best we can do is beg it to behave differently.

Twitter is no tyrant, and we are not supplicants. We do have elected representatives whose responsibility it is to protect citizens fundamental rights as opposed to the interest of shareholders. In the end, the power to regulate big tech belongs to the democratically accountable, not to big tech itself. If they are to succeed, our grievances should be directed at them.

About the author

tienne Brown is an assistant professor of philosophy at San Jos State University, holds a Ph.D. from the Sorbonne, and is a Public Voices Fellow at TheOp-Ed Project. He teaches the philosophy of law and the ethics of technology to the aspiring computer scientists of Silicon Valley.

Read more here:

[COMMENTARY] Twitter Is Not a Town Square; We Should Stop Treating It Like One - HillReporter.com

Newhouse Professor Wins Facebook Reality Labs Research Grant to Study Impacts of Augmented and Virtual Reality – Syracuse University News

Posted on by

Makana Chock

Makana Chock, David J. Levidow Professor of Communications in the Newhouse School, has been awarded a $75,000 research grant from Facebook Reality Labs to explore the impacts of augmented and virtual reality (AR/VR) on bystander privacy.

Chock will work withSe Jung Kim, a doctoral student in Newhousesmass communicationsprogram. They will focus on two countries with disparate cultural normsthe U.S. and South Koreato examine the impact of cultural differences on privacy concerns and ultimately inform the design of AR/VR technology.

This is another example of how many of the leading communications companies in the world are turning to the Newhouse School to better understand some of the challenges we are facing as a society, says Newhouse Dean Mark J. Lodato.

Chock developed her proposal, AR/VR recording: Cultural differences in perceptions of bystander privacy, in response to Facebooks request for proposals on responsible innovation in AR/VR: Consider Everyone.

Chock says the ubiquitous and covert nature of AR/VR recording poses the threat of serious privacy violations as bystanders are captured without permission. At the same time, different societies often have different concepts of bystander privacy, and those differences are reflected in the way image recording is regulated.

In the individualist culture of the U.S., recording bystanders in a public space is largely accepted and often protected under the First Amendment. In the collectivist culture of South Korea, where a higher premium is placed on privacy, express permission is required to record individuals. Yet even there, younger adults regularly post images and recordings on social media that may contain bystanders.

Additionally, Chock says bystander privacy issues are especially important when it comes to vulnerable populations like immigrants.

Over the last few years, immigrants in both the U.S. and South Korea have faced restrictions and increased scrutiny from the government agencies, as well as discrimination and bullying from some members of their communities, she says. These factors may heighten concerns about privacy and the potential misuse of immigrants personal information or images. It is therefore important to increase awareness among AR/VR users of bystanders concerns and the potential for inadvertent harm.

The three-part study will begin with an online survey conducted in both countries to assess potential differences in bystanders privacy perceptions and concerns and identify additional concerns of targeted immigrant groups. The team will then conduct a series of in-depth interviews with a subset of survey participants to provide additional qualitative data about cultural differences in bystander privacy concerns. Finally, they will facilitate a series of focus groups comprised of U.S. and South Korean users in a multi-user social VR environment in order to determine if the cultural differences seen in real world public spaces also apply in social VR spaces.

Chock is set to be the founding research director of the Newhouse Schools new XR lab and is co-leader of the Virtual and Immersive Interactionsresearch clusterat Syracuse University.

Go here to read the rest:

Newhouse Professor Wins Facebook Reality Labs Research Grant to Study Impacts of Augmented and Virtual Reality - Syracuse University News

Facebook Workrooms: the worst of in-person office life, now in VR – Quartz

Posted on by

At this point in the pandemic, I would happily sit through a meeting that could have been an email if it meant being in the same room with a bunch of work friends. So when Facebook releasedHorizon Workrooms, an app that allows people to gather in a virtual-reality office, I was prepared to keep an open mind about its potential.

After all, humanity seems destined to one day leap into the metaverse, the internetwe will not just use but inhabit, so why not check out a vision of what that might look like according to a powerful company that hopes to help shape it, for better or worse.

Only two other people at my office own, or will admit to owning, an Oculus Quest 2 headset, the $300 headset required to experience Workrooms in VR. Together we created a tiny focus group: This would be the first time wed try to connect with others avatars in a virtual workspace.

Fortunately for Facebook, peoples lasting impressions of experiences are heavily influenced by how they end and not how they begin. Unfortunately for us, our onboarding process was bumpy.

As the only Gen-Xer in the group, I worried I might live up to stereotypes about older employees being stumped by new technology, so I was mortified when I could not find my way into the first meeting room I was invited to join. Instead, I landed on the virtual screen that acts as a portal for non-virtual guests to attend any gathering, as if on a regular video call.

Looking through my headset, I could see my cartoon avatar waiting to be teleported. On my laptop screen, the avatar for Quartzs CEO, a willing participant in our little experiment, sat alone. When I created a meeting room and invited him, we found ourselves in the same predicament, but with our roles reversed. (For the record, its surreal and somewhat embarrassing to be a dorky avatar staring up at the image of a real person on a video call-in screen. I understand why this feature has to exist when headsets are not yet in everyones tech arsenal, but I doubt that avatar-video hybrid meetings will be a hit.)

By our second attempt, I figured out what had gone wrong: Although it would seem intuitive to use your company email account to sign up for a workplace product, you actually need to log in with the same address you use for Facebook. This had not been obvious to me, nor to a third member of our group who also first appeared on the video screen in her headset. The takeaway: If youre going to try Workrooms, be prepared to share your ancient hotmail address, or maybe a nickname that hasnt been a part of your life since college, with your present-day peers and manager.

Eventually, all three of us came together in the apps conference room, where we initially spent some time checking out our digital bodies. The Oculus had warned us that legs may not be possible in every app, so it wasnt exactly surprising to find our bodies disappeared into floating blue office chairs at about hip level, but it was distracting.

It turns out that this isnt merely a result of Facebook rushing out a product a bit early, in VR, replicating legs that can walk or run is complicated, so they are absent in other VR meeting apps, too, including within the more graphically rich Spatial app, and in MeetinVR.

You might imagine then that ones virtual arms would compensate for the missing bottom limbs, but in Workrooms, they were instead unwieldy at times, often busy with their own projects underneath our virtual conference room table, or hanging in mid-air.

The app insists that users turn on hand tracking so your plastic controllers can be used as whiteboard pens, but the hand and finger functions seem glitchy and frustrating. To pick something up or select from menu items, youre supposed to make a pinching motion with your real fingers, which takes practice. At times we appeared to lose our CEOs attention as his avatar stared at his hands grabbing the air, seemingly catching flies Karate Kid-style.

Next, we checked out all the things our avatars could do in the programs bright, extremely generic conference room. Considering the resources Facebook would have at its disposal, we found the list of impressive in-app features surprisingly short. Heres what we liked:

By adding the remote desktop, a person could, in theory, spend their entire day working inside this other reality, popping in and out of virtual meetings. However, its unlikely that anyone would actually want to do that. After about 20 minutes, the Oculus 2 headset becomes hot and heavy on a persons face. Long meetings would also mean charging the hardware periodically because Workrooms seems to tax the battery.

But beyond the physical limitations, theres a bigger problem: The virtual rooms are so dull that a person would quickly run out of reasons to stay there.

Yes, you can switch up the seating arrangement so that youre facing your peers or taking in a presentation, and you can jump into a new seat in a blink just to view the room from different angles, but thats really all there is. You cannot huddle around a coffee bar for an informal chat, bond over foosball, or lounge in a Moon Pod.

Workrooms, in other words, only recreates the things we dont miss about office meetings, like the opportunity to watch someone give a PowerPoint presentation. Somehow, the worlds biggest social media site forgot to make its latest product social. And without unstructured time in the company of others in VR or elsewhere, its hard to imagine having the kinds of conversations that lead to creative breakthroughs and keep people motivated, or get people interested in the metaverse.

While it may be unfair to mock the details that will surely be refined as the software moves out of betafor example, how are the perpetually pleasant half-smiles on the avatars faces going to land during serious discussions?the apps dry focus on a corporate ritual is a let-down. We definitely expected to find more than an unremarkable conference room in the first virtual space Facebook has debuted since Zuckerbergs ode to the metaverse on an earnings call.

Still, I had to admit when I peeled off my headset that it felt like I actually had been somewhere else, with other people, for a change.

The virtual trip was not as energizing as the real visit to the office I made before the delta variant began surging, and I think we will need more private spaces if were actually going to socialize in a virtual office. But I do understand the optimistic forecasts that say the enterprise VR market will expand, possibly reaching $4 billion by 2023. (A few big firms, including PwC, have already begun experimenting with VR meetings.)

Its not a bad bet given the future that awaits us. One day, VR goggles might be lighter and the graphics less clumsy than they are today, but office closures during grim public health crises or devastating climate events may be just as common.

Originally posted here:

Facebook Workrooms: the worst of in-person office life, now in VR - Quartz

TikTok owner ByteDance buys a top virtual reality hardware startup – TechCrunch

Posted on by

TikTok parent company ByteDance seems to be looking to one-up Facebook anywhere it can. After taking over the mantle of most-downloaded social media app in the world with TikTok, ByteDance is coming for Facebooks moonshot, buying up its own virtual reality headset maker called Pico.

The deal first reported on by Bloomberg last week was confirmed by the company on Monday, though ByteDance didnt disclose a price tag for the deal. Pico had raised some $62 million in venture funding from Chinese firms, including a $37 million Series B in March. Like Oculus, they create both hardware and software for their VR devices. Unlike Oculus, they have a substantial presence in China. Pico may not hold the same name recognition as Oculus or HTC, but the company is a top VR hardware maker, selling to consumer audiences in China and enterprise customers in the Western world.

With Pico finding its home now at ByteDance, two of the worlds largest virtual reality brands now reside inside social media companies. Ironically, many of the companys North American customers Ive chatted with over the years seem to have at least partially opted for Pico headsets over Oculus hardware due to general weariness of Facebooks data and ads-dependent business models, which they fear Oculus will eventually become a larger part of.

Its no secret that the virtual reality market has been slow out of the gate, but Facebook has blazed the trail for the technology, dumping billions of dollars into an ecosystem that traditional investors have largely seemed uninterested in, in recent years.

Without knowing broad terms of the deal (Im asking around), its hard to determine whether this is a moment of resurgence for VR or another sign of a contracting market. What seems most likely to me is that ByteDance is indeed interested in building out a consumer VR brand and is aiming to follow in Facebooks footsteps closely while learning from their missteps and capitalizing on their contributions to the ecosystem. Whether the company solely focuses on the consumer markets in China or loosely pursues enterprise clients stateside as well is a big question ByteDance will have to address.

Go here to read the rest:

TikTok owner ByteDance buys a top virtual reality hardware startup - TechCrunch

3 Virtual and Augmented Reality Stocks to Buy Right Now – The Motley Fool

Posted on by

Virtual reality (VR) and augmented reality (AR) devices are still relatively niche types of consumer products, considering their hefty price tags and limited uses. But many tech companies are making big bets on the VR/AR market blowing up in the coming years.

If bullish predictions about the VR/AR market are correct, three companies in particular stand to benefit thanks to their firm holds on their respective niches in the space: Facebook (NASDAQ:FB), Sony (NYSE:SONY), and Microsoft (NASDAQ:MSFT). By investing in VR/AR stocks with a diversified range of focuses (social networking and social gaming for Facebook, narrative-driven gaming for Sony, and enterprise uses for Microsoft), investors can benefit from the rapid adoption across different industries.

Using AR headsets to view a digital image of a jet engine. Image Source: Microsoft.

Facebook's strategy for domination in VR started early with laying a solid foundation of technology and developer talent, mostly through acquiring existing VR hardware and software companies. Since its acquisition of Oculus VR in 2014,Facebook has acquired several other small yet high-performing studios likeBigBox and Unit 2. This talent lineup, combined with the company's early-mover status, put Facebook ahead of the competition in VR gaming.

The company's long-term vision for VR is much more grandiose than just gaming, though. Mark Zuckerberg has big plans for a Facebook-powered metaverse (essentially, a VR-powered social network or "digital world"), and the company stands light-years ahead of potential competitors in this sector thanks to its sheer user count and unmatched network effects. While Facebook still has some work to do in gaining public trust, it is one of the best bets on the future of VR and AR.

Sony's VR ambitions are focused more acutely on gaming -- especially on immersing players in the company's famous storyline-driven game franchises, as opposed to a social-driven game platform or metaverse. This focus is well suited for Sony's strong lineup of exclusive, narrative-based game franchises like God of War, The Last of Us, and most of the Uncharted titles.

Whether you're a gamer or not, the numbers don't lie: Sony's PS VR is the best-selling headset on the market today. This market leadership, combined with a forthcoming new PS VR built for the PlayStation 5, mean investors shouldn't overlook Sony as a leading stock in VR gaming.

While Microsoft has no public plans to develop VR or AR capabilities in its Xbox gaming division, the company's $22 billion contract to build AR headsets for the U.S. Army implies it will focus instead on VR/AR use in the government and enterprise sectors. Microsoft's enterprise "mixed reality" headset, the HoloLens 2, is used to train and guide employees through difficult tasks. For example, Lockheed Martin uses the HoloLens 2 to build spacecraft with efficient precision.

Microsoft is a great growth stock to own for multiple reasons, including its powerful cloud and Xbox's promising future in cloud gaming. The strong leadership position of the HoloLens 2 in enterprise and government solutions is yet another convincing reason to own the stock for the long haul.

Overall, expectations for high growth in the VR/AR space are not unwarranted. Fortune Business Insights forecasts that the global market for VR gaming will reach $45.2 billion by 2027 (from $5.1 billion in 2019).

This translates to a compounded annual growth rate (CAGR) of 31.8%, compared to a CAGR of only 5.3% for the overall gaming console market over the same forecast period. After this market hits the ground running, investors will be glad to own the three VR/AR stocks discussed above.

This article represents the opinion of the writer, who may disagree with the official recommendation position of a Motley Fool premium advisory service. Were motley! Questioning an investing thesis -- even one of our own -- helps us all think critically about investing and make decisions that help us become smarter, happier, and richer.

See original here:

3 Virtual and Augmented Reality Stocks to Buy Right Now - The Motley Fool

Report: Virtual Reality Still No Closer To Allowing Users To Make Out With Abraham Lincoln – The Onion

Posted on by

CAMBRIDGE, MAAccording to a new report issued Monday by researchers from the Massachusetts Institute of Technology Media Lab, years of advances in virtual reality have brought users no closer to being able to make out with a digital interface resembling Abraham Lincoln. While technology can now provide us with convincing interactive experiences in a variety of artificial environments, we are still unable to simulate convincing, steamy tongue kisses with President Lincoln, said MIT professor Spencer Roberts, explaining that VR had repeatedly failed to recreate the sensations of loosening the 16th U.S. presidents black bow tie, caressing his chest, feeling his taut, well-muscled shoulders, and wrapping ones legs around his powerful 6-foot-4-inch frame. Weve spent close to $65 million on this problem, and while we have succeeded in providing users with a recreation of what his stiff beard might have felt like against their cheek, we have yet to construct a workable replication of this rail-splitting frontiersmans lean and lanky flesh, which they could then explore with their lips. Its unfortunate, because this technology showed so much promise back in 1990, when we first built a computer that could run a 16-bit animated graphic of Lincoln doing a striptease that concluded with him wearing nothing but his stovepipe hat. Roberts went on to contrast the failure with VRs runaway success in building a simulation of what it would feel like to get drilled from behind by Lyndon B. Johnson.

Continue reading here:

Report: Virtual Reality Still No Closer To Allowing Users To Make Out With Abraham Lincoln - The Onion

Burning Man Is Completely in Virtual Reality This Year – Futurism

Posted on by

It's free to attend, but donations are welcome.Virtual Burning Man

The iconic desert festival Burning Man has moved entirely online for 2021 over COVID concerns, allowing attendees to roam the art-laden landscapes from the comfort of their own home and inside virtual reality, The Wall Street Journal reports.

Its not the first time the festivalhas moved online. Last year, a VR experience had to be put together in record time as the pandemic was only getting started. An estimated half a million people attended the virtual event at the time, according to the WSJ, over five times the amount that attended the in-person Burning Man back in 2019.

Attending this years event is also free, though donations are accepted. You can check out an overview of the virtual space for yourself here, straight from your browser.

Its a major shift for the many Burners who are usually willing to travel long distances to attend the event, normally held in the Nevada desert. This time, all they will have to do is strap on a VR headset to get their Burning Man freak on.

The event, called Virtual Burnthis year, is themed around decommodification, free expression, and self-reliance.

The events theme is The Great Unknown perhaps a nod to our uncertain future in the midst of a global pandemic and will include the traditional burning of a giant wooden effigy, the eponymous Burning Man. A real effigy will actually be lit in the desert, but the lighting will be livestreamed over VR as well, the WSJ reports.

COVID isnt keeping all physical Burners away. An unofficial event called Renegade Burn being held in the Nevada desert is expecting some 10,000 people gathering at the site, according to Billboard.

Similarly, last year saw a large group of people attend a Not-Burning Man for their own unofficial event.

But at least organizers are trying their best to make virtual Burners feel like theyre attending the real thing this year. They programmed in a rainstorm in the desert, causing hours of virtualized delays just like it did in real life back in 2013.

READ MORE: How Could Burning Man Get Weirder? When Its in Your Living Room. [The Wall Street Journal]

More on Burning Man: Neuralink Co-Founder Has an Idea for a New Religion

Here is the original post:

Burning Man Is Completely in Virtual Reality This Year - Futurism

Freedom of expression issues clouding virtual reality world, according to Venice VR Expanded heads – Screen International

Posted on by

Venice VR Expanded co-creators Liz Rosenthal and Michel Reilhac have warned of freedom of expression issues threatening to stop daring and ground-breaking VR work being seen widely.

The Venice organisers need to work with the leading VR platforms, who are generally strong supporters of artists in the fast growing VR field, in order to distribute virtual-reality projects online. The hitch comes with what these platforms are allowing to be seen.

They have a very strict moral code with very strictly defined family moral values, Reilhac said.

Any piece that does not comply with the platforms criteria is rejected, he explained. Nudity and sex are completely impossible to show on any of the platforms which really contradicts the notion that VR is a new art form and that therefore new artists want to use the medium to express freely their story worlds, Reilhac added.

This means, for example, that some works chosen for the Venice programme cant be shown through the platforms. Taiwanese director Tung-yen Chous sexually explicit In The Mist, dealing with a gay experience in a male sauna, is one example of a project affected.

We had to pull it out of competition because it cannot be seen on the platforms but weve kept it as a special event, Reilhac noted.

In The Mist can only be seen in Venice itself or in one of the satellite cities but cannot be experienced online.

Highly politicised projects are also being affected.

A panel is being held in Venice on September 8 as part of the VR Expanded progamme to explore the options available to artists whose work does not fit within the family values boundaries set by some of the VR platforms.

After a fully virtual edition last year, the Venice VR Expanded programme has returned to the Lido as a physical event, albeit on a smaller scale than in previous years.Based in rooms in the Venice Casino, the VR programme has had to vacate (for now) its old home on Lazzaretto Vecchio, an island 50 yards off the Lido. This means it lacks the space and facilities to host or present installations.

However, the online presence continues to grow while satellite cites including Beijing, Paris, Berlin, Amsterdam, Moscow, Portland and Barcelona are also producing their own local events at which the Venice VR selections are being showcased.

A new VRChat metaverse world gallery has also been established. There are 24 projects in Competition; 11 projects in the Best Of section; one project in the Biennale College Cinema VR section and one special event, out of competition.

Competition projects include Barry Gene Murphy and May Abdallas Goliath, a story of a man with schizophrenia who finds connection with the world by playing video games. It is narrated by Tilda Swinton.

Another high-profile title in competition is Glimpse, directed by the Irish filmmaking duo Benjamin Cleary and VR creator Michael OConnor, and which stars Taron Egerton and Lucy Boynton. The anthropomorphic tale details the break-up of a relationship between a panda and a deer.

Another competition title highlighted by the organisers is Taiwanese director Hsin-chien Huangs Samsara, a dystopian project set in a near future in which the environment has been completely destroyed by the human race. Humans have to flee to find a new home in space. They re-engineer their DNA and evolve into a new form and then search for a new planet on which to live.

All the competition works are world premieres.

Venice remains the only major festival which includes VR as an integral part of its main programme. The other festivals that have a significant VR section, they all have it on the side. Its not part of the official selection, says Reilhac. I guess it is because they dont believe yet it (VR) is an art form. We are very, very thankful to the Biennale and to Alberto Barbera, the artistic director, to trust us and give us the time over the years to really show that this is an art form.

Read the original:

Freedom of expression issues clouding virtual reality world, according to Venice VR Expanded heads - Screen International

Playing a virtual reality game during medical procedures can reduce pain and anxiety in children | Keck School of Medicine of USC – USC News

Posted on by

A study done by Childrens Hospital Los Angeles and the Keck School of Medicine of USC shows that engaging in virtual reality may also reduce the need for anesthetics.

Anyone who has watched a child face a doctor with a needle knows how stressful those moments can be for all involved. For children with serious medical conditions undergoing frequent procedures like blood draws and catheter placements, the ongoing anxiety and fear can take a toll. Now, a study published in JAMA Network Open shows that virtual reality can decrease pain and anxiety in children undergoing intravenous (IV) catheter placement.

Jeffrey Gold, PhD, a professor of clinical anesthesiology, pediatrics, psychiatry & behavioral sciences at the Keck School of Medicine of USC and an investigator at The Saban Research Institute of Childrens Hospital Los Angeles, has been investigating the use of virtual reality (VR) for nearly two decades as a technique to help children undergoing painful medical procedures. His research shows that the technology can make a big difference in a patients experience. In fact, Childrens Hospital Los Angeles now routinely offers VR for blood draws.

Some patients dont even realize that their blood is being drawn, says Dr. Gold. Compare that to a child who is panicking and screaming, and its a no-brainer. We want kids to feel safe.

Turning pain and fear into childs play

This new study examines whether engaging in a VR game can prevent pain and ease stress for patients undergoing a peripheral intravenous catheter (PIVC) placement. The game is simple but requires focus and participation. Patients in one group played the VR game throughout the procedure, while those in another group received standard of care the use of a local anesthetic cream coupled with distraction techniques. The patients who used VR reported significantly lower levels of pain and anxiety.

We can actually reduce pain without the use of a medication, says Dr. Gold. The mind is incredibly powerful at shifting focus and actually preventing pain from being registered. If we can tap into that, we can make the experience much better for our kids.

Children arent the only ones who benefit

This is one of the first studies to analyze the effects of VR not only from the patient perspective, but also from that of the clinician and the patients family or caregivers. All three of these groups reported a more positive experience with the use of VR.

We started this as a way to mitigate pain and overall distress in children. But caregivers and healthcare providers are also reporting improved outcomes, adds Dr. Gold. Effectively treating the patient clearly has a ripple effect.

Consider a typical scenario in which a child has a chronic illness and must routinely receive PIVC placement. A patient experiencing anxiety about her procedure may tense up, making it more difficult for the clinician to find a vein and insert the catheter. If multiple attempts are necessary, a childs fear may amplify, causing a snowball effect, which in turn may impact medical adherence and ultimately long-term health outcomes.

If, on the other hand, the patient plays a virtual game while undergoing the procedure, she may relax and experience less pain, improving the overall experience for the child, the family, and the healthcare provider.

Stress actually causes veins to constrict, says Dr. Gold, but you dont need to know the physiology to know that its better to have a relaxed kid.

The ripple effect goes further. A childs experience during a visit sets the tone for future visits. If the experience feels traumatic, the child and family may be less likely to adhere with scheduled visits or may feel more stressed coming back to the hospital. We dont want a childs healthcare experience to be another adverse childhood experience, says Gold. Adverse childhood experiences, also called ACEs, can lead to poor health outcomes.

We care about the healthcare experience that children have, says Dr. Gold. By reducing fear associated with routine procedures, we prepare the child to begin treatment with a more positive outlook, and this can affect their health for a lifetime.

About the study

The studys co-authors include Michelle SooHoo, PhD, Andrea M. Laikin, PhD, Arianna S. Lane, BA, and Margaret J. Klein, MS, of The Saban Research Institute of Childrens Hospital Los Angeles.

This research is funded by Beatrice and Paul Bennett, the Tower Cancer Foundation, the Cancer Free Generation, and hardware and software donations from AppliedVR. Dr Gold reports providing consultation to AppliedVR and receiving equity in the form of stock options outside the submitted work.

See the original post here:

Playing a virtual reality game during medical procedures can reduce pain and anxiety in children | Keck School of Medicine of USC - USC News

Apples virtual reality headset could borrow power from iPhones and Macs, report claims – The Independent

Posted on by

Apples virtual or augmented reality headset will rely on another device such as a connected iPhone or Mac, according to a new report.

The company has been long rumoured to be working on its own headset, which would either create whole new virtual realities or layer graphics on top of the real world to create an augmented reality.

Now new details suggest that it will include its own specially-designed chip, which will lack some of the power of the processors in other devices like the iPhone or Mac. Instead, when it needs those capabilities, it will communicate with another device that is nearby, according to the new report from The Information.

It will not have the neural engine that sits at the centre of the iPhone, iPad and Mac and allows it to do artificial intelligence or machine learning processes more quickly, for instance.

But it will instead have specific capabilities designed to address the needs of such a headset. It will be able to wirelessly send and receive data particularly quickly, and will be better at decompressing video, the report claimed.

Apple pursued a similar strategy with its earlier Watches, which handed much of the complicated processing over to the iPhone with which it was paired. Over time, as battery life has improved and processor speed has increased, the Apple Watch has become more capable on its own.

The same report also claims that the headset will have an image sensor the size of the lenses that work as displays, and has proven difficult in manufacturing. That would presumably allow for the creation of augmented reality experiences not by layering virtual objects on top of the world, but by taking video of that world and showing users a new and edited video.

Rumours of an upcoming Apple AR or VR headset have been swirling for years, but have become more concrete and precise in recent months, seemingly as the product comes close to launch.

Reports have suggested that Apple is in fact planning two distinct versions of the headset. The first will offer high end VR capabilities but at a high price and in a potentially unwieldy helmet-style design, which could only be aimed at developers; the more mainstream version that packs all that into smaller hardware and a lower price point and is aimed primarily at augmented reality is expected to follow later.

The exact timing of those release dates remain unclear. Some have suggested the first, larger headset will arrive next year, though it could be the year after; the glasses have been rumoured to arrive somewhere between 2023 and 2025.

Apple and its chief executive Tim Cook have spoken in detail about their plans for augmented reality, which is already central to the iPhone and iPad, including with the addition of LiDAR sensors that can create 3D models of the space. Mr Cook has been optimistic about augmented reality since at least 2017, when he told The Independent that the technology will change the world and that Apples combination of hardware and software meant it was uniquely positioned to lead that transformation.

But it has been much quieter about its plans for specific hardware built for virtual reality. It is yet to publicly confirm that it is even working on such technology, despite a number of leaks.

Mr Cook said in that same interview that the company would only ship its own virtual or augmented reality products when it could do so in a quality way.

Go here to read the rest:

Apples virtual reality headset could borrow power from iPhones and Macs, report claims - The Independent

Thirdverse to Launch a New VR Sword Fighting Game in Early 2022 – Virtual Reality Times

Posted on by

Thirdverse, the developer behind Swords of Gargantua, is planning to release a new sword fighting game in early 2022.

Famitsu confirmed this in a recent interview with Thirdverses Teruyuki Toriyama who told the site the developer is planning to launch a sword fighting action game in early 2022. Toriyama revealed that the new gamed will be geared towards casual players as opposed to Swords of Gargantua.

It isnt clear whether the new game will feature any connection to Thirdverses older title. The developers Swords of Gargantua is still undergoing several updates and strongly emphasizes sword combat. It is also known to be exceedingly tough and the earliest comparisons of the game referenced the Dark Soul series. It seems like the new experience of the game will be casting the net a little wider and embracing more players who may not be able to cope with the difficulty in Swords of Gargantua.

The Toriyama interview didnt reveal any platforms but he did note that the Oculus Quest headset left an impact on him after several years as a producer at Sony Interactive Entertainment where he worked on both PSVR and flatscreen titles.

Thirdverse has recently raised more than $10 million to be pumped into virtual reality titles and it roped in Inxile Entertainment boss Brian Fargo to the company in an advisory capacity. Thirdverse also tapped on Hironao Kunimitsu to steer the company.

Follow this link:

Thirdverse to Launch a New VR Sword Fighting Game in Early 2022 - Virtual Reality Times

Virtual Reality in Tourism Market Size Growth Forecast 2020 to 2025 – Northwest Diamond Notes

Posted on by

The Virtual Reality in Tourism Market report upholds the future market predictions related to Virtual Reality in Tourism market size, revenue, production, Consumption, gross margin and other substantial factors. It also examines the role of the prominent Virtual Reality in Tourism market players involved in the industry including their corporate overview. While emphasizing the key driving factors for Virtual Reality in Tourism market, the report also offers a full study of the future trends and developments of the market.

The analysis on Virtual Reality in Tourism Market presents a realistic assessment of the current market situation, including the Virtual Reality in Tourism market size with regards to the volume and renumeration. The Virtual Reality in Tourism market report has been prepared based on the synthesis, analysis, and clarification of information about the global Virtual Reality in Tourism market from dedicated sources. The report is a collection of significant data related to the competitive landscape of the industry.

Virtual Reality in Tourism market size report mentions the key geographies, market landscapes alongside the product price, revenue, volume, production, supply, demand, market growth rate, and forecast etc. The study offers a thorough assessment of the products manufactured by the firms, specifications, including their application frame of reference.

Request Sample Copy of this Report @ https://www.nwdiamondnotes.com/request-sample/6540

The Virtual Reality in Tourism market report consist competitive study of the major Virtual Reality in Tourism manufacturerswhich will help to develop a marketing strategy.

Top key playersof industry are covered in Virtual Reality in Tourism Market Research Report:

Synopsis of the competitive landscape

Split by product type,with production, revenue, price, market share and growth rate of each type, can be divided into:

3D, 4D and Other

Split by application,this report focuses on consumption, market share and growth rate of Virtual Reality in Tourism market in each application and can be divided into:

Travel Agency, Hotel, Tourist Attractions and Other

An overview of market segmentation

Major Key factors of Virtual Reality in Tourism market is explained in this report are as below:

Request Customization on This Report @ https://www.nwdiamondnotes.com/request-for-customization/6540

See the original post here:

Virtual Reality in Tourism Market Size Growth Forecast 2020 to 2025 - Northwest Diamond Notes

Apple VR/Augmented Reality Headset must be connected to iPhone – Tech News Inc

Posted on by

Apples mixed reality headset will need a device thats better able to handle the bulk of the computations required for the screen.

If we believe the rumors currently circulating, An apple In recent months she will be working on a virtual / augmented reality headset. Some say that the launch of this new product could happen as early as this year, or next year, but it must be admitted that very little is known about this project. However, a new report from The Information brings Some new details about this supposed device.

Thus, according to the article in question, Apple has finished work on the chip that will equip this headset. The first phase of production testing to test the physical design will be ready to begin. And apparently, TSMC is Apples preferred partner for this chip, which is not too surprising because the Chinese manufacturer is very close to Cupertino.

The report goes on to explain that although the device is indeed wireless, it must be connected to another device. It can be a smartphone, tablet or computer, and it is the latter that will perform the bulk of the calculations required for viewing in virtual / augmented reality.

Its no surprise that Apple made the decision to use the computing power of an iPhone or iPad to do the heavy lifting for the headset. Right now, the Apple Watch still needs the iPhone to receive notifications and calls (unless you opt for the LTE version, of course). Apple recently left clues here and there about its intentions for augmented and virtual reality without confirming the development of a product dedicated to the technology.

Its also hard to know when this helmet will be able to see daylight. If the first production tests can begin anyway, theres a good chance that marketing wont happen this year. So it will be 2022 at best.

Certified gamer. Problem solver. Internet enthusiast. Twitter scholar. Infuriatingly humble alcohol geek. Tv guru.

Read more:

Apple VR/Augmented Reality Headset must be connected to iPhone - Tech News Inc