Place to Build a Subway
4 by amortize | 0 comments on Hacker News.
Middlesbrough
Middlesbrough News Featured post
Kim Jong-un: fragile and under pressure but he won’t give up
The Observer The North Korean leader’s surprise freeze of his nuclear programme is less a genuine move than a diplomatic manoeuvre,...
Tuesday, 28 July 2020
The pandemic is raising concerns about how teens use technology. But there’s still a lot we don’t know.
A new report from Common Sense media raises concerns about the potential impact of social media on teenagers’ mental health | Photo by INDRANIL MUKHERJEE/AFP via Getty Images
A new report from Common Sense Media analyzes current research on how social media impacts teens’ mental health.
As the US continues to struggle to contain the coronavirus pandemic and social distancing recommendations remain in place, millions of US children and adolescents aren’t expected to attend school in-person in the fall — meaning they’ll often be stuck inside their homes and using the internet as a primary means of human connection. The situation has resurfaced a longstanding, difficult-to-answer question: Is technology going to ruin my teenager’s brain?
For years, some have blamed the growing rate of teenagers suffering from mental health issues in the US on the drastic increase in how much they’re engaging with digital devices compared to previous generations — but there isn’t much hard evidence to back up those claims.
It’s true that we’re seeing unprecedented levels of teenagers using digital devices — some 95% percent of US teens have access to a smartphone, and 45% say they are online “almost constantly,” according to a 2018 Pew poll. And during the same period of time that internet and smartphone use has increased for a generation of young people, the suicide rate in the US has also steadily increased (across all ages overall), with a disproportionate increase in the rate of tween girls aged 10 to 14 in particular.
But the rise of teenagers’ use of social media at the same time that depression rates have been going up shows correlation, not causation. Meaning, there’s no evidence to prove that teenagers’ use of social media is the reason why we’re seeing this increase in depression instead of any number of other confounding factors — like their family life, economic conditions, or anything else. To know if that’s the case or not, we need a lot more comprehensive research that isolates these other factors.
Considering how important the stakes are, answering this open question is important — and pressing.
A new report from the nonprofit Common Sense Media, a national advocacy group focused on digital access and safety for children and families, reflects the urgency and state of the conversation. The report, written by UC Irvine child psychology professor Candice Odgers and Common Sense research director Michael Robb, attempted to review the existing research about the effects of tech use on teens, draw conclusions about the overall risks and benefits, and suggest recommendations for parents, educators, and the public. But one of the biggest conclusions from Common Sense’s report is that the existing research doesn’t tell us enough, and we need more refined scientific evidence to know anything conclusive about the effects of social media on teenagers’ mental health.
In the meantime, it’s worth understanding what the concerns around the impact of social media on teenage mental health are are — and what to consider when it comes to figuring out how to help teens have a balanced relationship with technology, especially while living through a pandemic.
The concern: “Our kids are walking around with slot machines in their pockets”
Jennifer Siebel Newsom, First Partner to California’s Governor Gavin Newsom, who contributed an essay to the report, wrote that she understands digital devices like tablets and laptops are necessary tools for getting an education during Covid-19 school shutdowns. But she says she’s also worried about the effects of these devices on children and teens’ mental health.
“[A]s a mom, I can’t ignore the reality in my home. Distance learning for my four kids this spring opened the floodgates to media and its adverse effects. What started with using Zoom and Gmail for homework assignments became internet searches bringing up age-inappropriate information — and misinformation,” wrote Siebel Newsom. “All of a sudden my eldest were sneaking off to their rooms, or hiding devices under their beds at night.”
Both Sibel Newsom and others who contributed to the report, like former Democratic presidential candidate and entrepreneur Andrew Yang, want to see technology and media companies accept more responsibility for their impact on children, even if we don’t yet have research showing exactly what that impact is. Yang in particular called for the government to drastically fund more research and step in, if needed, to incentivize tech companies to educate children, rather than entertain them, to collect ad dollars. (The children’s digital advertising market is expected to be worth $1.7 billion by 2021, according to a report from PwC.)
“Right now, the interests of parents are directly at odds with the interests of the technology companies,” wrote Yang. “They’re monetizing our attention and profiting off of our time. As they say, the addictive nature of smartphones is a feature, not a bug. We parents are outgunned and at a total loss.”
Both Newsom and Yang’s comments are drawing on much larger anxieties across the American public about what their kids are doing with their time online, and how this will impact their development.
The evidence is inconclusive and we need more research
So, while there’s no shortage of concern about how much time adolescents are spending on their phones, what does the research actually say?
Unfortunately, not enough for us to draw any quantitative, evidence-based conclusions — and that’s why we should start doing that research in earnest now. The report’s meta-analysis of the most up-to-date research on social media and depression revealed a mix of “small positive, negative, and mostly neutral” links between adolescents’ use of technology like social media and their mental health.
Authors of the report looked at two large-scale reviews of existing research on the topic published earlier this year, and found findings associating adolescents’ mental health and use of digital technology “inconsistent” — and even when an association was present, it accounted for for less than 1% of the variation.
This failure to find a stronger link between teen depression and technology use “is not surprising,” Odgers et al writes, “given that mental health disorders emerge from a complex set of social, genetic, and experiential factors, which have varying influence across development and situations.” Still, “small effects can be meaningful,” the report states, “but with existing evidence we have no way to separate cause from effect in social media research with adolescents.”
If researchers wanted to actually separate cause from effect, we would need research that asks more specific questions, backed by harder data, as my Vox colleague Brian Resnick has previously explained. Self-reported surveys on teens’ well-being can be biased — so instead, another option would be for scientists to use brain scans showing neurological development over time to track the tangible effects of social media on children’s wellbeing.
While there is at least one large study like this underway, that’s funded by the National Institutes of Health, it will be several years before we see its results. Until then, researchers are asking for more granular data from companies like Apple and Google to help them understand exactly how these kids are using their devices — ie: are they binging on Fortnite, or watching educational YouTube videos? So far, tech companies like Apple largely haven’t given researchers the option to see people’s screen time data that shows how much they use different apps on their phone, for example — even with their consent.
With all this in mind, the report calls for the government and other groups to fund more research on this important topic.
Recommendations: quality over quantity
While the jury’s still out on exactly how social media impacts teens, the report does offer some child psychologist-backed recommendations for teen tech use in the meantime.
An important one: It’s not how much teens use apps that matters — but how they’re using those apps. In essence, it’s quality over quantity. Examples of quality use include a teen using multiplayer video games to socialize with their peers and build stronger friendships, the report argues. Another example of positive tech use is when first-year college students use their smartphones to maintain close contact with their parents. One study cited in the report showed these students were better at bouncing back from outside stress than their peers who stayed in touch with their families less often.
The report stressed that while many families have instituted rules about how much their kids use technology, the fights parents are having with their children over this are actually making things worse. In fact, “conflict over screens is likely to be more harmful to adolescents’ mental health than screen time itself,” Common Sense’s report states.
While there’s a lot we still don’t know about technology and its impact on teens’ mental health, it’s an important issue that’s only become more serious during the pandemic. That’s why we need better research before jumping to any conclusions.
You can read the report in full here.
from Vox - All https://www.vox.com/recode/2020/7/29/21346005/how-does-technology-social-media-impact-teenagers-brains-research-common-sense-report
via HDMI Installers
6 of the cheapest VPNs for staying anonymous online
All those hours you've spent searching for the perfect reaction GIF or drooling over recipes on YouTube seem insignificant in the grand scheme of things — but to Google, hackers, your internet service provider (ISP), and even certain government agencies, that browsing history is a valuable commodity.
And guess what? They're probably tracking and logging every digital move you make. Like, right now. The best thing you can do to make sure your online activities are undetectable and untraceable is to invest in a VPN.
A VPN is a service that makes your web presence more difficult to track and trace, and if someone can't track or trace your web presence, they can't collect your personal data and do suspect things with it — like sell it to advertisers or use it to incriminate you in nefarious activities. Read more...
More about Tech, Cybersecurity, Vpn, Mashable Shopping, and Uk Deals
BEST FOR BEGINNERS
SurfsharkThis up-and-comer outshines its more established (and expensive) peers in terms of both value and functionality.
- Monthly: £9.49/month
- One-year plan: £4.79/month
- Two-year plan: £1.59/month
BEST FOR NETFLIX
CyberGhost VPNThis widespread VPN offers dedicated streaming servers and friendly support resources that won't intimidate VPN newbies.
- Monthly: £10.29/month
- One-year plan: £4.59/month
- Two-year plan: £3.09/month
- Three-year plan: £2.10/month
BEST FOR GEOGRAPHIC DIVERSITY
PureVPNA basic but competent VPN with an impressive amount of servers in Africa — a rarity among its peers.
- Monthly: £8.63/month
- One-year plan: £2/month
BEST FOR TORRENTING
NordVPNNordVPN is a P2P beast, but be sure to play with its security settings to keep things speedy.
- Monthly: £9.68/month
- One-year plan: £5.66/month
- Two-year plan: £4.04/month
- Three-year plan: £2.82/month
BEST FOR EXPERTS
Private Internet AccessDo as much (or as little) fiddling as you want with this highly flexible VPN.
- Monthly: £2.45/month
- One year: £4.72/month
BEST FOR APPS
IvacyVPNThis cheap provider is supported on basically every platform.
- Monthly: £7.73/month
- One-year plan: £2.72/month
- Two-year plan: £1.75/month
from Mashable https://mashable.com/uk/roundup/best-cheap-vpn-services-uk/
via Middlesbrough
The Trump administration is refusing to fully reinstate DACA
DACA recipients and their supporters rally outside the US Supreme Court on June 18, 2020, in Washington, DC. | Drew Angerer/Getty Images
DREAMers are facing limbo yet again as Trump explores ending DACA for a second time.
The Trump administration announced Tuesday that it is considering trying again to end the Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals (DACA) program and will not be accepting new applications from immigrants who hope to gain its protections, throwing the future of hundreds of thousands young immigrants who came to the US as children into doubt.
The Supreme Court ruled on June 18 that President Donald Trump couldn’t end the program, which has allowed almost 700,000 unauthorized immigrants known as “DREAMers” to live and work in the US free from fear of deportation, without a more robust rationale. In the weeks since that decision, the administration had remained silent as to whether it would consequently start accepting new applications for the program, causing confusion among those who have been waiting for years for a chance to apply.
Chad Wolf, the acting secretary of Homeland Security, clarified Tuesday that the administration is reviewing the policy further and may well move forward with ending the program. In the meantime, it will impose new restrictions on applicants — a move that immigrant advocates say is a blatant violation of the Supreme Court’s decision.
That review will examine the legality of the DACA program, which former President Barack Obama created via executive order in 2012, and its impact on immigration trends, a senior administration official told reporters.
“I have concluded that the DACA policy, at a minimum, presents serious policy concerns that may warrant its full rescission,” Wolf wrote in a policy memorandum issued Tuesday. “At the same time, I have concluded that fully rescinding the policy would be a significant administration decision that warrants additional careful consideration.”
In the meantime, the administration will reject all new DACA applications and related applications for work permits, as well as halve the period for which renewals will be valid from two years to just one year. It will also reject most new and pending requests for advanced parole, which allows DACA recipients to travel outside the US for humanitarian, education, or employment purposes.
Approximately 66,000 people have become eligible for the program since 2017, when Trump first tried to rescind the program and stopped accepting new applications. They may have previously missed out because they hadn’t completed the educational requirements or joined the military.
The decision makes DACA a key immigration issue in this fall’s presidential election. It’s not likely that the Trump administration could end DACA entirely before the election or even Inauguration Day in 2021. But if Trump wins a second term, time would be on his side. And even if he leaves office, the only way that DREAMers, including those who have long waited for a chance to apply for DACA, can get assurance of their right to remain in the US is if Congress intervenes.
The DACA program remains popular among both Republicans and Democrats: even 69 percent of Trump voters support protections for DREAMers, according to a recent Politico/Morning Consult poll. But the move suggests Trump is again resorting to restrictive immigration policies as a means of rallying his base.
Former Vice President Joe Biden, the presumptive Democratic nominee, has vowed to restore DACA and resume accepting new applications. He would also try to work with Congress to pass permanent protections for DREAMers.
“Make no mistake, the vast popularity of the program, combined with a looming election, prevented Trump from immediately ending the program,” Andrea Flores, deputy director of immigration policy for the American Civil Liberties Union, said in a statement. “But this policy memo makes his intentions clear: His next move is a complete end to the DACA program to destroy the lives of Dreamers once again.”
Immigrant advocates say Trump is obligated to accept new DACA applications
Most people who are granted DACA maintain their status for two years, after which they can apply to renew in additional two-year increments indefinitely. They typically apply while they are still in school or after graduating from high school so that they can obtain a work permit and get a job or attend university.
Immigrant advocates have argued that the Trump administration has been openly defying the Supreme Court’s decision and other court orders, issuing rejection notices to those who tried to newly apply for DACA status. (It has been accepting renewals.)
Lawyers for DACA recipients who had challenged Trump’s initial decision to end the program back in 2017 recently told a New York federal judge that they were concerned that administration officials were ignoring the Supreme Court’s “unambiguous decision and their legal obligations” in refusing to process new applications. And House Democrats Zoe Lofgren and Jerrold Nadler penned a letter to Trump claiming that his failure to resume processing new DACA applications constituted “illegal usurpation of authority in violation of the separation of powers.”
A federal judge in Maryland ordered the Trump administration on July 17 to begin processing new applications, finding that the Supreme Court’s ruling restored the program to its status before Trump tried to terminate it in September 2017.
US District Judge Ryan Grimm didn’t set a deadline for the administration to comply, but he is moving forward with a hearing addressing the question of whether he should hold the administration in contempt. And in a recent telephonic briefing, he criticized the administration for failing to clarify its policies with regard to new DACA applications in a timely manner.
“It creates a feeling and a belief that the agency is disregarding binding decisions by appellate and the Supreme Court,” he said. “There is a cost for not having these things clarified, and the plaintiffs have borne the lion’s share of that cost thus far.”
But a senior administration official said Tuesday that Grimm didn’t have the final say given that there remains pending litigation over new DACA applications in other federal courts.
Trump could rescind DACA without Congress’s help
Following the Supreme Court’s ruling, Trump claimed that he still wanted to end the program and would submit new paperwork backing up that decision. He accused the justices on Twitter of punting the DACA issue, which has been the subject of contentious legislative debate for the better part of a decade.
It’s not clear exactly how he intends to end the program. He could do so without Congress’s help, but he said during a press conference at the White House on Tuesday that he also intends to work with Congress on creating a “merit-based system” for immigration. He didn’t elaborate further on what that meant, but he has previously described such a system as one that prioritizes high-earners and skilled workers over those with family ties to the US.
The administration could terminate DACA using the same method it employed in 2017: The Department of Homeland Security could issue another memo. Trump could also issue an executive order terminating DACA. But either method would likely be challenged and swiftly blocked in federal court, said Stephen Yale-Loehr, a professor at Cornell Law School. Whether, and how quickly, the administration could defend its policy on appeal remains an open question.
The justices wrote in their opinion that if they wanted their decision to survive in the courts, the administration would have to address why it decided not to partially roll back protections for DACA recipients — such as taking away their work authorization but still shielding them from deportation. It’s not clear whether the Trump administration has any interest in more narrowly revoking their protections, but even so, it would be devastating for DREAMers to lose their ability to work in the US.
The administration would also have to address why the interests of DACA recipients, who have relied on the program since 2012, do not outweigh the administration’s interests in terminating the program. DACA recipients have been settled in the US for years — some arriving before they were old enough to remember — and have earned degrees and established careers and families here. The Trump administration, on the other hand, has expressed concern that DACA could face litigation because it alleges the program was created illegally via executive action.
Alternatively, the administration could try terminating DACA via the regulatory process, which would put termination on stronger legal footing. But the entire process could last months, if not years, requiring that officials draft and issue a proposed rule, solicit comments from the public, and address those comments before publishing a final rule.
“Neither alternative is likely to terminate the DACA program before the presidential election in November,” Yale-Loehr said. “This makes the election even more important than before. If President Trump wins reelection, he will have another four years to try to terminate the DACA program.”
Support Vox’s explanatory journalism
Every day at Vox, we aim to answer your most important questions and provide you, and our audience around the world, with information that has the power to save lives. Our mission has never been more vital than it is in this moment: to empower you through understanding. Vox’s work is reaching more people than ever, but our distinctive brand of explanatory journalism takes resources — particularly during a pandemic and an economic downturn. Your financial contribution will not constitute a donation, but it will enable our staff to continue to offer free articles, videos, and podcasts at the quality and volume that this moment requires. Please consider making a contribution to Vox today.
from Vox - All https://www.vox.com/policy-and-politics/2020/7/28/21345481/trump-daca-supreme-court-dreamers
via HDMI Installers
Big Tech CEOs will face 'anti-conservative bias' claims at hearing. They're BS—and dangerous.
When the CEOs of Big Tech testify in Congress on Wednesday, they’ll almost certainly be hit with a dubious and regular Republican talking point: censorship of conservative voices on social media.
President Donald Trump and other politicians and pundits on the right love to complain that social media companies “censor conservatives.” There is no evidence that's true. In fact, conservative news thrives on Facebook. Of Trump’s thousands of lies, Twitter had the audacity to lightly fact-check him three times.
During the hearing before the House Antitrust Subcommittee, Apple’s Tim Cook, Amazon’s Jeff Bezos, Facebook’s Mark Zuckerberg, and Google’s Sundar Pichai will try to convince lawmakers their corporate behemoths aren’t monopolies. These companies absolutely need to be interrogated about their unprecedented wealth and power. But, thanks partly to the flow of dark money, Republicans have hijacked the conversation to push the narrative that they are the real victims in all of this. Read more...
More about Facebook, Twitter, Content Moderation, Tech, and Politicsfrom Mashable https://mashable.com/article/anti-conservative-bias-facebook/
via Middlesbrough
Monday, 27 July 2020
Seth Meyers mocks the White House's weird defense of 'Paw Patrol'
"This is where the Trump administration and Republican party are at," said Late Night host Seth Meyers on Monday. "Whining about cartoons and Legos while sending secret police to gas moms and vets and arguing that slavery was a, quote, 'necessary evil.'"
The U.S. is continuing to play moral limbo, straining just how low it can go before completely collapsing. As Meyers notes, more Americans believe the U.S. is on the wrong track than at any previous point of Trump's presidency — which says a lot considering his approval ratings have been consistently low.
The entire country is enduring substantial fear and uncertainty right now. So, to reassure the populace, Trump's White House condemned both the alleged cancellation of cop-themed children's cartoon Paw Patrol and Lego's halt on selling their City Police Station set. Read more...
More about Lego, Donald Trump, Seth Meyers, Late Night With Seth Meyers, and Paw Patrolfrom Mashable https://mashable.com/video/seth-meyers-donald-trump-paw-patrol-lego/
via Middlesbrough
Amazon has just launched a helpful face mask store
TL;DR: Amazon has launched the Face Mask Store, designed to help customers find the most suitable product for their needs.
We've tried to stay on top of the best places to purchase face masks over the past few months, with Etsy and ASOS topping the list.
Amazon has been suspiciously quiet when it comes to face masks, but that has all changed with the launch of its Face Mask Store. It's designed to help customers find the most suitable face mask for their needs.
The online store provides search filters for the main types of mask (reusable, disposable, certified, PPE) and pack size (small, medium, large). You may be able to find cheaper options elsewhere, but this face mask hub is hard to beat in terms of convenience. Read more...
More about Face Mask, Mashable Shopping, Shopping Uk, Uk Deals, and Coronavirusfrom Mashable https://mashable.com/uk/shopping/amazon-face-mask-store-july-28/
via Middlesbrough
New top story on Hacker News: How Did the Casio F91W Become a Terrorist Icon?
How Did the Casio F91W Become a Terrorist Icon?
19 by joeschmoe83 | 3 comments on Hacker News.
Middlesbrough
19 by joeschmoe83 | 3 comments on Hacker News.
Middlesbrough
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)