Audio Ad Sales Firm Partners With Podcast-Hosting Platform On Dynamic Ad Insertion http://ift.tt/2lMrwD8 AdLarge Media, an audio ad sales firm that represents radio, digital, and mobile content providers, said it has partnered on dynamic ad insertion with Panoply's Megaphone, the company's podcast hosting and ad-serving platform. Mobile Marketing via MediaPost.com: mobile http://ift.tt/IwxUQO February 27, 2017 at 01:56AM
0 Comments
http://ift.tt/2lO0v0C
An AI-Editing War Is Taking Place On Wikipedia’s Pages http://ift.tt/2lOgaNC Over time, the encyclopedia’s software robots can become locked in combat, undoing each other’s edits and changing links, say researchers For many it is no more than the first port of call when a niggling question raises its head. Found on its pages are answers to mysteries from the fate of male anglerfish, the joys of dorodango, and the improbable death of Aeschylus. But beneath the surface of Wikipedia lies a murky world of enduring conflict. A new study from computer scientists has found that the online encyclopedia is a battleground where silent wars have raged for years. Since Wikipedia launched in 2001, its millions of articles have been ranged over by software robots, or simply “bots”, that are built to mend errors, add links to other pages, and perform other basic housekeeping tasks. In the early days, the bots were so rare they worked in isolation. But over time, the number deployed on the encyclopedia exploded with unexpected consequences. The more the bots came into contact with one another, the more they became locked in combat, undoing each other’s edits and changing the links they had added to other pages. Some conflicts only ended when one or other bot was taken out of action. “The fights between bots can be far more persistent than the ones we see between people,” said Taha Yasseri, who worked on the study at the Oxford Internet Institute. “Humans usually cool down after a few days, but the bots might continue for years.” The findings emerged from a study that looked at bot-on-bot conflict in the first ten years of Wikipedia’s existence. The researchers at Oxford and the Alan Turing Institute in London examined the editing histories of pages in 13 different language editions and recorded when bots undid other bots’ changes. They did not expect to find much. The bots are simple computer programs that are written to make the encyclopedia better. They are not intended to work against each other. “We had very low expectations to see anything interesting. When you think about them they are very boring,” said Yasseri. “The very fact that we saw a lot of conflict among bots was a big surprise to us. They are good bots, they are based on good intentions, and they are based on same open source technology.” While some conflicts mirrored those found in society, such as the best names to use for contested territories, others were more intriguing. Describing their research in a paper entitled Even Good Bots Fight in the journal Plos One, the scientists reveal that among the most contested articles were pages on former president of Pakistan Pervez Musharraf, the Arabic language, Niels Bohr and Arnold Schwarzenegger. Related: How bots are taking over the world | Dan O’Hara and Luke Robert Mason One of the most intense battles played out between Xqbot and Darknessbot which fought over 3,629 different articles between 2009 and 2010. Over the period, Xqbot undid more than 2,000 edits made by Darknessbot, with Darknessbot retaliating by undoing more than 1,700 of Xqbot’s changes. The two clashed over pages on all sorts of topics, from Alexander of Greece and Banqiao district in Taiwan to Aston Villa football club. Another bot named after Tachikoma, the artificial intelligence in the Japanese science fiction series Ghost in the Shell, had a two year running battle with Russbot. The two undid more than a thousand edits by the other on more than 3,000 articles ranging from Hillary Clinton’s 2008 presidential campaign to the demography of the UK. The study found striking differences in the bot wars that played out on the various language editions of Wikipedia. German editions had the fewest bot fights, with bots undoing other’s edits on average only 24 times in a decade. But the story was different on the Portuguese Wikipedia, where bots undid the work of other bots on average 185 times in ten years. The English version saw bots meddling with each other’s changes on average 105 times a decade. The findings show that even simple algorithms that are let loose on the internet can interact in unpredictable ways. In many cases, the bots came into conflict because they followed slightly different rules to one another. Yasseri believes the work serves as an early warning to companies developing bots and more powerful artificial intelligence (AI) tools. An AI that works well in the lab might behave unpredictably in the wild. “Take self-driving cars. A very simple thing that’s often overlooked is that these will be used in different cultures and environments,” said Yasseri. “An automated car will behave differently on the German autobahn to how it will on the roads in Italy. The regulations are different, the laws are different, and the driving culture is very different,” he said. As more decisions, options and services come to depend on bots working properly together, harmonious cooperation will become increasingly important. As the authors note in their latest study: “We know very little about the life and evolution of our digital minions.” Earlier this month, researchers at Google’s DeepMind set AIs against one another to see if they would cooperate or fight. When the AIs were released on an apple-collecting game, the scientists found that the AIs cooperated while apples were plentiful, but as soon as supplies got short, they turned nasty. It is not the first time that AIs have run into trouble. In 2011, scientists in the US recorded a conversation between two chatbots. They bickered from the start and ended up arguing about God. Hod Lipson, director of the Creative Machines Lab at Columbia University in New York, said the work was a “fascinating example of the complex and unpredictable behaviours that emerge when AI systems interact with each other.” “Often people are concerned about what AI systems will ultimately do to people,” he said. “But what this and similar work suggests is that what AI systems might do to each other might be far more interesting. And this isn’t just limited to software systems – it’s true also for physically embodied AI. Imagine ACLU drones watching over police drones, and vice versa. It’s going to be interesting.”
guardian.co.uk © Guardian News & Media Limited 2010 Published via the Guardian News Feed plugin for WordPress. PHOTO: “Humans usually cool down after a few days, but the bots might continue for years,” said a researcher. Some conflicts only ended when one or other bot was taken out of action. Photograph: Nicole Wilder/Syfy/NBCU/Getty Images Mobile Marketing via PSFK http://www.psfk.com/ February 27, 2017 at 01:25AM
http://ift.tt/2lO0v0C
An AI-Editing War Is Taking Place On Wikipedia’s Pages http://ift.tt/2lOgaNC Over time, the encyclopedia’s software robots can become locked in combat, undoing each other’s edits and changing links, say researchers For many it is no more than the first port of call when a niggling question raises its head. Found on its pages are answers to mysteries from the fate of male anglerfish, the joys of dorodango, and the improbable death of Aeschylus. But beneath the surface of Wikipedia lies a murky world of enduring conflict. A new study from computer scientists has found that the online encyclopedia is a battleground where silent wars have raged for years. Since Wikipedia launched in 2001, its millions of articles have been ranged over by software robots, or simply “bots”, that are built to mend errors, add links to other pages, and perform other basic housekeeping tasks. In the early days, the bots were so rare they worked in isolation. But over time, the number deployed on the encyclopedia exploded with unexpected consequences. The more the bots came into contact with one another, the more they became locked in combat, undoing each other’s edits and changing the links they had added to other pages. Some conflicts only ended when one or other bot was taken out of action. “The fights between bots can be far more persistent than the ones we see between people,” said Taha Yasseri, who worked on the study at the Oxford Internet Institute. “Humans usually cool down after a few days, but the bots might continue for years.” The findings emerged from a study that looked at bot-on-bot conflict in the first ten years of Wikipedia’s existence. The researchers at Oxford and the Alan Turing Institute in London examined the editing histories of pages in 13 different language editions and recorded when bots undid other bots’ changes. They did not expect to find much. The bots are simple computer programs that are written to make the encyclopedia better. They are not intended to work against each other. “We had very low expectations to see anything interesting. When you think about them they are very boring,” said Yasseri. “The very fact that we saw a lot of conflict among bots was a big surprise to us. They are good bots, they are based on good intentions, and they are based on same open source technology.” While some conflicts mirrored those found in society, such as the best names to use for contested territories, others were more intriguing. Describing their research in a paper entitled Even Good Bots Fight in the journal Plos One, the scientists reveal that among the most contested articles were pages on former president of Pakistan Pervez Musharraf, the Arabic language, Niels Bohr and Arnold Schwarzenegger. Related: How bots are taking over the world | Dan O’Hara and Luke Robert Mason One of the most intense battles played out between Xqbot and Darknessbot which fought over 3,629 different articles between 2009 and 2010. Over the period, Xqbot undid more than 2,000 edits made by Darknessbot, with Darknessbot retaliating by undoing more than 1,700 of Xqbot’s changes. The two clashed over pages on all sorts of topics, from Alexander of Greece and Banqiao district in Taiwan to Aston Villa football club. Another bot named after Tachikoma, the artificial intelligence in the Japanese science fiction series Ghost in the Shell, had a two year running battle with Russbot. The two undid more than a thousand edits by the other on more than 3,000 articles ranging from Hillary Clinton’s 2008 presidential campaign to the demography of the UK. The study found striking differences in the bot wars that played out on the various language editions of Wikipedia. German editions had the fewest bot fights, with bots undoing other’s edits on average only 24 times in a decade. But the story was different on the Portuguese Wikipedia, where bots undid the work of other bots on average 185 times in ten years. The English version saw bots meddling with each other’s changes on average 105 times a decade. The findings show that even simple algorithms that are let loose on the internet can interact in unpredictable ways. In many cases, the bots came into conflict because they followed slightly different rules to one another. Yasseri believes the work serves as an early warning to companies developing bots and more powerful artificial intelligence (AI) tools. An AI that works well in the lab might behave unpredictably in the wild. “Take self-driving cars. A very simple thing that’s often overlooked is that these will be used in different cultures and environments,” said Yasseri. “An automated car will behave differently on the German autobahn to how it will on the roads in Italy. The regulations are different, the laws are different, and the driving culture is very different,” he said. As more decisions, options and services come to depend on bots working properly together, harmonious cooperation will become increasingly important. As the authors note in their latest study: “We know very little about the life and evolution of our digital minions.” Earlier this month, researchers at Google’s DeepMind set AIs against one another to see if they would cooperate or fight. When the AIs were released on an apple-collecting game, the scientists found that the AIs cooperated while apples were plentiful, but as soon as supplies got short, they turned nasty. It is not the first time that AIs have run into trouble. In 2011, scientists in the US recorded a conversation between two chatbots. They bickered from the start and ended up arguing about God. Hod Lipson, director of the Creative Machines Lab at Columbia University in New York, said the work was a “fascinating example of the complex and unpredictable behaviours that emerge when AI systems interact with each other.” “Often people are concerned about what AI systems will ultimately do to people,” he said. “But what this and similar work suggests is that what AI systems might do to each other might be far more interesting. And this isn’t just limited to software systems – it’s true also for physically embodied AI. Imagine ACLU drones watching over police drones, and vice versa. It’s going to be interesting.”
guardian.co.uk © Guardian News & Media Limited 2010 Published via the Guardian News Feed plugin for WordPress. PHOTO: “Humans usually cool down after a few days, but the bots might continue for years,” said a researcher. Some conflicts only ended when one or other bot was taken out of action. Photograph: Nicole Wilder/Syfy/NBCU/Getty Images Mobile Marketing via PSFK http://www.psfk.com/ February 27, 2017 at 01:25AM What To Expect From Mobile World Congress http://ift.tt/2mmnBys The Mobile World Conference has kicked off in Barcelona, with thousands heading to the world's largest and most highly regarded mobile industry event. As all eyes turn to MWC, analyst firm Ovum has revealed what it thinks consumers can expect to see at the event in its report, MWC 2017. According to Ovum, a key theme, which recurs throughout the report, is the belief that MWC 2017 will mark a further shift in the evolution of the industry, towards a world where the internet is everywhere, every ‘thing’ is smart and machines are ever more intelligent. Mobile Marketing via MediaPost.com: mobile http://ift.tt/IwxUQO February 27, 2017 at 01:21AM
http://ift.tt/1DUrqIH
Mobile-First? Don't Write Off The Tablet http://ift.tt/2lMpqDy Research shows tablets are as prominent in opening emails as the desktop. The two channels are very much alike, questioning our assumption that it's overwhelmingly a mobile-first market. Mobile Marketing via MediaPost.com: mobile http://ift.tt/IwxUQO February 27, 2017 at 01:13AM AOL And Adsquare Form Data Partnership To Improve Audience Targeting http://ift.tt/2lMeV3a AOL and mobile data exchange adsquare formed a partnership to bring adsquare's global data from 360 million mobile consumers to the ONE by AOL platform, its cross-screen programmatic platform. Mobile Marketing via MediaPost.com: mobile http://ift.tt/IwxUQO February 27, 2017 at 12:10AM Researchers Advocate 'Unified Commerce' http://ift.tt/2mvU6qU Personalization ranks front and center of the initiatives retailers are planning to add so they can improve the customer experience based on new research from Boston Research Partners about customer engagement at the point of sale. Mobile Marketing via MediaPost.com: mobile http://ift.tt/IwxUQO February 27, 2017 at 12:10AM Facebook, Amazon, 7-Eleven Ranked Most 'Mobile-Ready' Brands http://ift.tt/2mvEZxK Brick-and-mortar convenience store retailer 7-Eleven is the most "mobile-ready" brand that isn't inherently a digital media product, according to a new index ranking thousands of brands worldwide based on their mobile "readiness." Dubbed Mdex, the new index created by IPG Mediabrand's Ansible mobile media unit in partnership with YouGov and Google, and it utilizes a variety of quantitative and qualitative factors to score each brand's mobile readiness. Mobile Marketing via MediaPost.com: mobile http://ift.tt/IwxUQO February 27, 2017 at 12:10AM Has Ad Blocking Lost Its Shine? Let's Hope So http://ift.tt/2l3Q9Nb With no money in blocking ads for free, Shine is now Rainbow -- and it wants to make money by selling data from the consumers it protects to the industry has been castigating. Good luck with that. Mobile Marketing via MediaPost.com: mobile http://ift.tt/IwxUQO February 26, 2017 at 11:30PM
http://ift.tt/2m2qt2T
AI Picks Out The Most Influential People In Stock-Like Market http://ift.tt/2mCmnLC AI Picks Out The Most Influential People In Stock-Like MarketCompanies can now use an algorithm to know the importance of an influential marketer and assign them a stock price Influential, a three-year-old company based in California, designed an algorithm to acquire data across social media platforms to find the top one percent of influential marketers on social media. Companies use this information to choose the best individual to send out a sponsored message to post to followers on a weekly basis. The algorithm lists 50 different traits to provide a match score to the influential marketer. When companies get this information, the individual has a stock price based on how high of a score they have. Influential also wants to supply the information to agencies who work with influential marketers to show their worth to specific companies. The Influential algorithm launched on February 13 for influential marketers and brands. Mobile Marketing via PSFK http://www.psfk.com/ February 26, 2017 at 11:29PM |
CategoriesArchives
April 2023
|