X is notifying users that they might experience a decrease in their number of followers while the company undertakes a comprehensive effort to eliminate spammers and bots from the network. X’s Safety account has announced that the firm will be launching a proactive initiative to delete accounts that breach X’s regulations regarding platform manipulation and spam. This project is described as substantial and aims to take decisive action against such accounts.

X recently made a decision to add two new leaders to its safety team. Kylie McRoberts, who already works at X, has been appointed as the Head of Safety. Additionally, Yale Cohen, who formerly worked at Publicis Media, has joined X as the Head of Brand Safety and Advertiser Solutions.

Elon Musk has shown a strong desire to address the issue of spam at X. In November 2022, he informed staff that his intention was to prioritize the fight against spam in the future.

Nevertheless, the challenge of combating spam has proven to be more formidable than anticipated, particularly due to significant reductions in staff within Twitter’s Trust & Safety team. Additionally, the position of Head of Safety remained unfilled for a period of 10 months following the exits of Ella Irwin and Yoel Roth during Musk’s tenure.

The progress in AI has also increased the challenge of controlling spam.

In a previous investigation by TechCrunch, it was noted that Musk’s attempt to charge customers for verification did not effectively prevent spammers from using the network. Several bots, identified by their Verified Blue checkmark, were discovered responding to posts on X with a modified version of the statement, “I regret to inform you that I am unable to provide a response as it violates OpenAI’s use case policy.” This clearly indicated that these were not human users but rather automated bots.

Furthermore, a recent article by the New York Intelligencer has provided a comprehensive account of the increasing prevalence of spam that promotes adult content. This spam is disseminated through explicit answers, which include links in the users’ bios for others to click on.

Musk’s dissatisfaction with the magnitude of spam on the network was a major obstacle when he initially attempted to withdraw from the $44 billion Twitter transaction. He claimed that the firm had been dishonest about the quantity of bots. However, at present, Musk is promoting the fact that X is experiencing an unprecedented amount of website visitors, but he has not specified if his statistics account for automated programs and unsolicited messages.

As per the release from the X Safety team, the firm plans to take extensive measures to eliminate spam and bots from the network, potentially leading to a decrease in follower counts. This is typical of the regular bot sweeps conducted on its platform.

X also included a link to a form where people who were unintentionally impacted by the bot purge could submit an appeal.

Although the Americas were the last continents on Earth to be inhabited by humans (excluding Antarctica), they are believed to have been the birthplace of numerous language families throughout history. By tracing the origins of these dialects back to their prehistoric roots, a recent study has unveiled a fascinating connection between every North American language and two ancient Siberian mother tongues. These languages were introduced to America approximately 24,000 and 14,000 years ago, respectively.

In the time before English, Spanish, French, or Dutch were spoken in North America, the continent was filled with around 200 distinct language families, creating a rich tapestry of linguistic diversity. It is believed that the first of these vernaculars was introduced when glaciation created a pathway from Siberia to Alaska during the late Pleistocene. However, tracing the spread and evolution of this language over the years poses a challenging narrative.

Renowned linguist Johanna Nichols from the University of California, Berkeley, conducted a comprehensive study to decode this oral history. She analyzed the semantic features of 60 diverse North American languages, representing various language families and covering the entire geographical range of the continent. In order to group these languages together, Nichols examined “16 linguistic structural features that are recognized or expected to be reliable indicators of language families, regions, or underlying types.”

Some features that can be found in languages include gendered nouns, numeral classifiers, and pronouns that vary based on the speaker. For instance, the first-person singular pronoun may have “n” as its first consonant, while the second-person singular form may have “m” instead.

Ultimately, Nichols discovered that all languages can be traced back to two original populations. The first population settled along the west coast of North America, with two waves of Siberian immigrants arriving 24,000 and 15,000 years ago. During a period when glaciation prevented human settlement north of the Columbia River, these two groups of newcomers interacted in California and Oregon, leading to the emergence of the first unique group of American languages.

According to Nichols, this dialect stands out for its frequent use of n-m pronouns and came before the emergence of the second Siberian language type. This language type emerged among the earliest inland communities after the creation of an ice-free corridor approximately 14,000 years ago. This second founder population gave rise to the languages spoken by the famous Clovis culture, which occupied parts of North America prior to 10,000 BCE. These languages are characterized by polysynthesis, where sentence-like words can be formed by stacking up affixes.

Speakers of these dialects later interacted with a fourth wave of Siberian entrants around 12,000 years ago. This interaction led to the development of a family of languages that were different from those spoken in California and Oregon. These languages eventually became the common language among the earliest settlers of the Pacific Northwest.

In conclusion, Nichols suggests that the ancient Siberian linguistic populations played a crucial role in establishing the initial American populations, based on the analysis of structural profiles.

In her writing, she highlights that the structural properties of the founder languages still have a significant influence on modern linguistic populations. This suggests that the ancient glaciation events that created these entry windows shaped the distribution of North American languages.

The study has been published in a reputable academic journal.

Individuals with INS citizenship struggle to effectively distinguish between factual information and political opinions. New research led by experts from the University of Illinois Urbana-Champaign’s Department of Political Science may not deliver the news you were hoping for in an election year.

Co-author Professor Jeffery J. Mondak emphasized the need for citizens to be able to distinguish between opinions and facts in order to navigate the abundance of political information they encounter daily.

Navigating through the abundance of controversial content on social media, viral misinformation, and AI-generated false news makes it difficult to uncover the truth behind a political narrative. Mondak and Matthew Mettler, the co-authors, think that the challenges of distinguishing truth from fabrication begin at a higher level.

There is an extensive body of research on disinformation. Mondak stated that individuals struggle to differentiate between claims of fact and opinion before categorizing something as disinformation.

Study participants were tasked with categorizing 12 assertions regarding current events as either “fact” or “opinion” for investigation purposes. An example of a factual statement is “President Barack Obama was born in the United States,” while a statement of opinion is “Democracy is the greatest form of government.” The online survey took place from March 9 to March 14, 2019, and had 2,500 participants from various regions of the country.

45.7 percent of the respondents did this exercise at a level equivalent to random chance.

Common characteristics were observed among individuals who excelled at the task. Increased awareness of current events and civics, higher education levels, and enhanced cognitive ability were all linked to a little improvement in performance.

Political partisanship was the primary factor driving inaccurate responses.

Democrats and Republicans frequently create a distorted reality where they believe their side is presenting facts and the other side is only expressing opinions as political views become more polarized, as Mondak demonstrated.

Many errors were not random, but rather numerous erroneous responses. The inaccuracies were systemic, as many respondents tailored their replies to align with their party narrative.

Mettler stated that partisan bias impairs people’s ability to reason through statements. The evolution of news reporting is exacerbating the situation. “Currently, there is a growing tendency, particularly on cable news, to mix opinion and fact,” Mondak remarked.

These findings reveal a significant percentage of the public that not only holds conflicting views on political matters but also disagrees on the fundamental concept of what qualifies as a fact.

Mondak and Mettler are worried that this makes individuals vulnerable to manipulation and less receptive to attempts to rectify disinformation, like those made by fact-checking organizations or reputable science news websites.

A consensus of agreeing to disagree can arise even for problems of incontrovertible fact. Mondak clarified that it is not possible to simply agree to disagree on the fact that 2 + 2 equals 22.

Is there any action we can take despite the grim scenario?

The authors emphasize in their research that fact-checking can address inaccuracies but cannot prevent them. We need to revisit school, where individuals are initially instructed on distinguishing between fact and opinion. Media organizations can solidify the line between factual reporting and opinion by repeatedly emphasizing it to the audience.

The authors contend that because people struggle to accurately distinguish between facts and opinions, they are more likely to fall prey to misinformation.

The research is featured in the Harvard Kennedy School Misinformation Review.