Latest news with #GoogleDocs
Hindustan Times
2 days ago
- Lifestyle
- Hindustan Times
At India's No-Agenda Spaces, read, laze, lounge in a stranger's home
It isn't often one has the chance to simply be, with no agenda, no demands on one's time or presence, no one even asking what you're up to. Meghna Chaudhury home is 'open' five days a week, from 12.30 pm to 4.30 pm. In urban-planning jargon, a space where one can unwind in this manner is, of course, called a third place (after home and work). A park or waterfront, a library or even a local café can typically serve this function. The idea is that one should be able to walk in alone, unannounced, with no need for small talk, and simply relax from the pressures and demands of the day. There aren't many spaces like this in urban India. Parks can feel unsafe, especially if one isn't a man. Lounging or 'loitering' can invite stares or worse. Earlier this year, Meghna Chaudhury, 36, decided to do something about this. In January, the mental-health advocate (she is pursuing a Master's degree in global mental health) declared her home in Indiranagar, Bengaluru, a No-Agenda Space. The 'anti-performance', 'anti-small-talk' environment is now 'open' five days a week, from 12.30 pm to 4.30 pm. Slots must be reserved in advance, and ID shown at the door (for safety reasons). After that, one may walk in silently if one chooses, read on the couch, lounge in the balcony, even grab a snack from the 'food box' in the kitchen. Her dog Millimeter has been excited to welcome visitors, but one may choose to ignore her if one pleases. About 200 books sit on shelves, up for grabs. There are art supplies too. But many people simply come in, sit down and do nothing, enjoying a little quiet time by themselves, Chaudhury says. Slots can be booked via a Google Docs link available in her Instagram bio (@meghnachaudhury). Identity proof must be sent in via SMS before the address is shared. This, and a fee of ₹ 80, are all the precautions Chaudhury has taken. (Also, the space is not currently open to men.) 'It's insane how worried everybody was. I was only ever worried about protecting my headspace, but honestly people have been outstanding. Everybody respects my boundaries,' she says. At the heart of her initiative was a mission to enable asymmetrical relationships in a transactional world, Chaudhury says. This has been a joy to witness, she adds. 'Women who live nearby and met here have started to meet socially. Visitors have thanked me with handwritten notes. I wish people gave me more handwritten notes. I love them,' she says. In an even-more-heartening development, four women across Bengaluru, and one in Mumbai, have already followed in her footsteps. Financial consultant Mugdha Cheemakurthy has hosted No Agenda Thursdays in Domlur since April 10. She asks that people contribute to the space via money or via snacks, trinkets or tiny items of home decor. Since March 25, tax consultant Parul Jain in Bommanahalli has invited strangers in, free (her space is also not currently open to men). Vidhu Vinod, 35, a marketing and strategy executive, opened up her home in Kaggadaspura in March. She isn't charging a fee yet but is considering asking visitors to donate to her favourite NGO, Hold My Paws. In Mumbai, nutritionist and personal trainer Shruti Jahagirdar has been inviting women in every Sunday since April 6. Each of these women has cited Chaudhury as their inspiration. 'I think this kind of space is so utterly simple and necessary,' Vinod says. Chaudhury hopes more will emerge over time. 'Today's world is so rushed. I hope that when people enter these spaces, they can live for a bit on a clock or pace of their choice. Things are also so transactional,' she adds. 'Here, the transaction is simply to care.'
The Star
2 days ago
- Business
- The Star
Balancing privacy, safety and accountability
AS of Jan 1, Malaysia recorded 25.1 million social media users, making it one of the most connected populations in the region. Most of these users voluntarily share personal data far beyond what is needed, for example, posting locations, preferences, routines and sometimes even sensitive information like their children's school details, vaccination records, or holiday plans. Ironically, while there is widespread concern over government or institutional data collection, little attention is paid to how private corporations such as Meta (Facebook), ByteDance (TikTok) and X (formerly Twitter) actively profile users for commercial gain. Facebook once claimed it would never sell user data, yet it infamously shared user data with Cambridge Analytica. This incident became a major scandal in global privacy discussions and involved not just basic data, but detailed personal information used for targeted political manipulation. If there is real concern about data being misused, then platforms that profit from mass data harvesting should be examined with equal, if not greater, intensity. One of the most overlooked realities in the digital age is this: there is no such thing as a free service. Every time a user signs up for a 'free' app or platform, be it social media, navigation tools, or online games, it is an exchange. Users grant access to their personal data, including their usage patterns, preferences, device details and even contacts, in return for these services. Most people accept the terms and conditions without reading them, unknowingly agreeing to large-scale data collection. Unlike the limited data gathered for national digital services for cybersecurity or to improve performance, tech giants build multi-billion-dollar empires on the back of detailed personal data profiles. This raises the question: why is there so much concern when a government programme or national platform transparently collects data for operational or protective purposes, while the daily exploitation by foreign platforms goes largely unchecked? Tech giants like Google and Apple have perfected the art of data collection. Gmail, Google Docs, Google Drive, Apple iCloud, Siri and Google Photos are all part of systems that continuously collect and analyse user data. This includes not just basic data, but actual content like search terms, voice commands, photos, browse history and even location. Apple may advertise itself as being focused on privacy, but even its basic data (such as who you called, when and for how long) is stored. Google, meanwhile, uses user behavior data for advertising, product development and AI training. Is the public truly informed about how much their data powers Google's AI models or Apple's products? More importantly, where is the outrage when these tech companies push updates that make it harder to opt out of data sharing? It is necessary to ensure fairness, ethical governance and consent in all forms of data collection, whether by governments or private companies. Nevertheless, we must avoid one-sided anger. A responsible national policy that uses shared data to detect cybersecurity threats or improve digital services should not be attacked while corporate data collection for profit is ignored. Not only that, data is also crucial in fighting online dangers. Protecting Malaysians in cyberspace is becoming more and more critical as online threats continue to grow. Shared user data plays a key role in the fight against cybercrime, helping to automatically detect scams, fraud and cyberbullying early on. With such incidents on the rise, using data responsibly is essential for public safety. Nevertheless, for such programmes to earn public confidence, the role of government oversight cannot be forgotten. It is vital that the MCMC and all relevant agencies do their part by performing careful checks. They must ensure that any data collected is stored and managed securely according to the highest international standards, making sure strong protections are in place to prevent data breaches. The public's trust depends on this strict oversight and accountability. Instead of debating endlessly, Malaysians should support the government's efforts to build a convenient and safer digital environment for all. Malaysians should answer the question of whether the need to protect the safety of Malaysians is more important than unproven claims of data privacy breaches. Prof Dr Selvakumar Manickam Universiti Sains Malaysia Cybersecurity Research Center director
Borneo Post
3 days ago
- Business
- Borneo Post
Protecting Malaysians in cyberspace more critical as online threats grow
Unlike the limited data gathered for national digital services for cybersecurity or to improve performance, tech giants build multi-billion-dollar empires on the back of detailed personal data profiles. – AI IMAGE AS of January 1, 2025, Malaysia recorded 25.1 million social media users, making it one of the most connected populations in the region. Most of these users voluntarily share personal data far beyond what is needed, for example, posting locations, preferences, routines, and sometimes even sensitive information like their children's school details, vaccination records, or holiday plans. Ironically, while there is widespread concern over government or institutional data collection, little attention is paid to how private corporations such as Meta (Facebook), ByteDance (TikTok), and X (formerly Twitter) actively profile users for commercial gain. Facebook once claimed it would never sell user data, yet it infamously shared user data with Cambridge Analytica. This incident became a major scandal in global privacy discussions and involved not just basic data, but detailed personal information used for targeted political manipulation. If there is real concern about data being misused, then platforms that profit from mass data harvesting should be examined with equal, if not greater, intensity. One of the most overlooked realities in the digital age is this: there is no such thing as a free service. Every time a user signs up for a 'free' app or platform, be it social media, navigation tools, or online games, it is an exchange. Users grant access to their personal data, including their usage patterns, preferences, device details, and even contacts, in return for these services. Most people accept the terms and conditions without reading them, unknowingly agreeing to large-scale data collection. Unlike the limited data gathered for national digital services for cybersecurity or to improve performance, tech giants build multi-billion-dollar empires on the back of detailed personal data profiles. This raises the question: why is there so much concern when a government program or national platform transparently collects data for operational or protective purposes, while the daily exploitation by foreign platforms goes largely unchecked? Tech giants like Google and Apple have perfected the art of data collection. Gmail, Google Docs, Google Drive, Apple iCloud, Siri, and Google Photos are all part of systems that continuously collect and analyze user data. This includes not just basic data, but actual content like search terms, voice commands, photos, browse history, and even location. Apple may advertise itself as being focused on privacy, but even its basic data (such as who you called, when, and for how long) is stored. Google, meanwhile, uses user behavior data for advertising, product development, and AI training. Is the public truly informed about how much their data powers Google's AI models or Apple's products? More importantly, where is the outrage when these tech companies push updates that make it harder to opt out of data sharing? It is necessary to ensure fairness, ethical governance, and consent in all forms of data collection, whether by governments or private companies. Nevertheless, we must avoid one-sided anger. A responsible national policy that uses shared data to detect cybersecurity threats or improve digital services should not be attacked while corporate data collection for profit is ignored. Not only that, data is also crucial in fighting online dangers. Protecting Malaysians in cyberspace is becoming more and more critical as online threats continue to grow. Shared user data plays a key role in the fight against cybercrime, helping to automatically detect scams, fraud, and cyberbullying early on. With such incidents on the rise, using data responsibly is essential for public safety. Nevertheless, for such programs to earn public confidence, the role of government oversight cannot be forgotten. It is vital that the Malaysian Communications and Multimedia Commission (MCMC) and all relevant agencies do their part by performing careful checks. They must ensure that any data collected is stored and managed securely according to the highest international standards, making sure strong protections are in place to prevent data breaches. The public's trust depends on this strict oversight and accountability. Instead of debating endlessly, Malaysians should support the government's efforts to build a convenient and safer digital environment for all. Malaysians should answer the question of whether the need to protect the safety of Malaysians is more important than unproven claims of data privacy breaches. * Professor Dr. Selvakumar Manickam is Director, Cybersecurity Research Center, Universiti Sains Malaysia.
Time of India
3 days ago
- Business
- Time of India
‘We take data security seriously': Scale AI locks down sensitive files of Google, Meta and xAI that were reportedly made publicly accessible
Scale AI has secured sensitive project files of clients, including Meta and xAI , after a report suggested that thousands of them, stored in Google Docs, were publicly accessible via links. Following the report, Scale AI, which uses human gig workers to improve the AI models of major tech companies, have now secured those files. A report by Business Insider cited four Scale contractors who remained anonymous to claim that this action temporarily prevented teams of workers from opening training documents. According to the report, thousands of Scale AI files that were previously reviewed and found to be public are now private. The company also recently resolved many of the document access issues for teams and contributors who are now being granted individual access to documents, one worker confirmed. What Scale AI said about securing its clients' files from public access In a statement to BI, a Scale AI spokesperson said, 'We take data security seriously. We remain committed to robust technical and policy safeguards to protect confidential information and are always working to strengthen our practices.' The company also said that it is conducting a thorough investigation and has disabled public document sharing from its systems. However, the company has yet to comment on the specific security changes it has implemented. by Taboola by Taboola Sponsored Links Sponsored Links Promoted Links Promoted Links You May Like 5 Books Warren Buffett Wants You to Read In 2025 Blinkist: Warren Buffett's Reading List Undo While the report didn't mention any signs of a data breach at Scale AI, cybersecurity experts said that publicly accessible documents could expose the company to potential hacking risks. As per the previous report, Scale AI left over 85 public Google Docs accessible online, exposing sensitive and confidential information related to AI projects for clients like Google and Meta. Some documents also contained employee contact details. The issue came to light after the older report prompted Scale AI to restrict document sharing. The sudden lockdown disrupted work for many contractors, with some teams losing access mid-task. The document lockout further added to the uncertainty faced by Scale AI contractors, who were already impacted by Meta's investment and hiring of CEO Alexandr Wang for its new AI initiative. Following the deal, Google paused several projects with Scale AI, and both OpenAI and xAI also halted work with the company. Contractors reported that projects were paused without warning, and while Scale AI informed them about the Meta investment, many were reportedly not notified about the client pullbacks. iQoo Neo 10 Review: Flagship-Like Gaming Experience at Just Rs 31,999!
Online Citizen
3 days ago
- Online Citizen
‘Finally heard': NTU student granted hearing, cleared of AI misconduct
SINGAPORE: A Nanyang Technological University (NTU) student who was penalised for the alleged misuse of Generative AI (GenAI) tools has shared that she was finally granted a hearing with university officials. In a Reddit post dated 24 June, the student said she had met with a panel comprising the academic chair, the head of her programme, and the associate provost. During the meeting, she was allowed to explain her writing process and respond to the allegations in detail. She described it as the first time she felt 'heard'. Students Penalised for Alleged AI Misuse On 22 June, NTU issued a statement saying that three students had received zero marks for a written assignment in a health and politics module after being found to have used GenAI tools in their submissions. The decision followed an investigation in April, with the students informed of the outcome in early May. The university said the essays were flagged for academic misconduct due to non-existent academic references, fictitious statistics, and broken web links. However, the student disputed the university's version of events, alleging that NTU's public statement did not reflect her experience accurately and that no proper opportunity was given for the students to defend themselves. She claimed that, prior to the hearing, no in-person meetings had been scheduled for the students to present their cases. Panel Finds No Evidence of AI Misuse in Student's Case In her Reddit update, the student described the hearing as a thorough review of her work. The panel reportedly examined her essay paragraph by paragraph and gave her ample time to explain her research and citation process. They also reviewed the citation tool she had used, which she said appeared as the first result in a Google search. After examining how the tool worked and assessing her Google Docs drafts and her understanding of academic sources, the panel concluded that her work did not involve the use of GenAI. She reported that the panel reassured her there would be no permanent record of the incident and that it would not appear on her transcript. The student added that NTU officials acknowledged the need to balance efficiency with creative thinking and expressed openness to developing consistent frameworks for AI-related assessments. Despite the positive outcome of the hearing, the student said she would proceed with a formal appeal to the academic board regarding her grade. She noted that while the professor in charge had already given her a zero, she hoped to recover marks for components not related to citations. Although concerned about the impact on her GPA, she expressed satisfaction with having advocated for herself and gone through the proper channels. Acknowledging Support and Encouraging Others The student took the opportunity to thank those who had supported her throughout the process. She praised the panel for offering the due process the case required and treating her with kindness and understanding. She also acknowledged a professor who had advocated for her despite being busy with a book project on Palestine and human rights. In addition, she credited the student union president for raising her issue with university leadership and speaking up about how easily citation errors could occur. Friends who had helped draft emails, brainstorm solutions, and even bought her small gifts to cheer her up were also thanked. She expressed particular appreciation to the Reddit community for helping to bring attention to the issue, saying the online support made her feel less alone. 'Don't be afraid to voice out if you ever feel a sense of injustice,' she wrote. 'Be meticulous about the procedures, record the right evidence, and know that you have every right to speak up — for yourself, and those who don't know how.' Reddit Users Applaud Student's Efforts, Question NTU's Initial Handling Under her Reddit post, many users congratulated the student for her persistence and courage in standing up for herself. Several noted that her actions had not only helped her own case but also opened the door for the other students involved to receive fair hearings. However, some users expressed disappointment at how NTU had initially handled the matter. One user remarked that it was disgraceful that the university 'only acted like a respectable, competent institution when faced with pressure from media'. Others argued that the university should have conducted a hearing from the outset, especially given the seriousness of the misconduct allegation. One user wrote that a proper review 'should've been the first thing NTU did when a professor slaps a student with such a serious offence'. One user who claimed to have previously worked in an academic support role expressed shock at how the case was handled. They criticised the university staff for failing to carry out basic steps, such as listening to the student and verifying the facts, before concluding that academic fraud had occurred. The user felt that although the professor had mishandled the situation, responsibility also lay with the wider academic staff. Calls for Accountability Some Reddit users also called for accountability on the part of the professor who issued the zero mark. One commented that the student 'deserved an apology' and hoped the professor's actions would have lasting consequences. Another user suggested that the professor should be removed from teaching, arguing that the mistake showed poor judgment. Grade Appeal Still Ongoing Despite the positive outcome of the hearing, some users expressed confusion and concern over whether the student's grade would remain at zero. 'If you're proven not to have cheated, why is the academic board keeping the zero?' one user asked. The student clarified that the hearing was separate from the grade appeal process, which was still ongoing. She said it could take several weeks to be processed but expressed hope that the final result would not remain a zero. She also provided an update that the two other students involved in the case were scheduled to have their hearings later in the same week. 'I've reached out to them on things to prepare for the meeting and will be supporting them as well. We'll be appealing our grades together,' she wrote.
