The Safe and Secure Innovation for Frontier Artificial Intelligence Models Act, or SB 1047, was a failed 2024 California bill intended to "mitigate the risk of catastrophic harms from AI models so advanced that they are not yet known to exist". Specifically, the bill would have applied to models which cost more than $100 million to train and were trained using a quantity of computing power greater than 1026 integer or floating-point operations. SB 1047 would have applied to all AI companies doing business in California—the location of the company would not matter. The bill would have created protections for whistleblowers and required developers to perform risk assessments of their models prior to release, with guidance from the Government Operations Agency. It would also have established CalCompute, a University of California public cloud computing cluster for startups, researchers and community groups. == Background == The rapid increase in capabilities of AI systems in the 2020s, including the release of ChatGPT in November 2022, caused some researchers and members of the public to become concerned about the existential risks associated with increasingly powerful AI systems. Hundreds of tech executives and AI researchers, including two of the so-called "Godfathers of AI", Geoffrey Hinton and Yoshua Bengio, signed a statement in May 2023 calling for the mitigation of the "risk of extinction from AI" to be a global priority alongside "pandemics and nuclear war". However, the plausibility of these risks is still widely debated. Strong regulation of AI has been criticized for purportedly causing regulatory capture by large AI companies like OpenAI, a phenomenon in which regulation advances the interest of larger companies at the expense of smaller competition and the public in general, although OpenAI ended up opposing the bill. Other advocates of AI regulation aim to prevent bias and privacy violations, rather than existential risks. For example, some experts who view existential concerns as overblown and unrealistic view them as a distraction from near-term harms of AI like discriminatory automated decision making. In the face of existential concerns, technology companies have made voluntary commitments to conduct safety testing, for example at the AI Safety Summit and AI Seoul Summit. In 2023, not long before the bill was proposed, Governor Newsom of California and President Biden issued executive orders on artificial intelligence. State Senator Wiener said SB 1047 draws heavily on the Biden executive order, and is motivated by the absence of unified federal legislation on AI safety. Historically, California has passed regulation on several tech issues itself, including consumer privacy and net neutrality, in the absence of action by Congress. == History == === Proposal and voting === The bill was authored by State Senator Scott Wiener. Wiener first proposed AI legislation for California through an intent bill called SB 294, the Safety in Artificial Intelligence Act, in September 2023. On February 7, 2024, Wiener introduced SB 1047. On May 21, SB 1047 passed the Senate 32–1. The bill was significantly amended by Wiener on August 15, 2024, in response to industry advice. Amendments included adding clarifications, and removing the creation of a "Frontier Model Division" and the penalty of perjury. On August 28, the bill passed the State Assembly 48–16. Then, due to the amendments, the bill was once again voted on by the Senate, passing 30–9. === Veto by governor === On September 29, Governor Gavin Newsom vetoed the bill. The deadline for California lawmakers to overrule Newsom's veto was November 30, 2024. Newsom cited concerns over the bill's regulatory framework targeting only large AI models based on their computational size, while not taking into account whether the models are deployed in high-risk environments. Newsom emphasized that this approach could create a false sense of security, overlooking smaller models that might present equally significant risks. He acknowledged the need for AI safety protocols but stressed the importance of adaptability in regulation as AI technology continues to evolve rapidly. Governor Newsom also committed to working with technology experts, federal partners, and research institutions, including the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace, led by former California Supreme Court Justice Mariano-Florentino Cuéllar; and Stanford University's Human-Centered AI (HAI) Institute, led by Dr. Fei-Fei Li. He announced plans to collaborate with these entities to advance responsible AI development, aiming to protect the public while fostering innovation. == Provisions == SB 1047 would have covered AI models with training compute over 1026 integer or floating-point operations and a cost of over $100 million. If a covered model is fine-tuned using more than $10 million, the resulting model would also have been covered. The bill would have defined critical harms with respect to four categories: Creation or use of a chemical, biological, radiological, or nuclear weapon Cyberattacks on critical infrastructure causing mass casualties or at least $500 million of damage Autonomous crimes causing mass casualties or at least $500 million of damage Other harms of comparable severity Developers would have needed to create a "safety and security protocol" before training covered models. Before deployment, they would have submitted a statement of compliance, confirming they took reasonable care to take measures to prevent covered models that pose an unreasonable risk of critical harms. The statement would have included risk assessments and descriptions of their compliance process. These rules would have applied to both covered models and their derivatives, including post-training modifications, with annual third-party audits required starting in 2026. Safeguards to reduce risk included the ability to shut down the model, which has been variously described as a "kill switch" and "circuit breaker". Whistleblowing provisions would have protected employees who report safety problems and incidents. Additionally, SB 1047 would have created a public cloud computing cluster called CalCompute, associated with the University of California, to support startups, researchers, and community groups that lack large-scale computing resources. === Compliance and supervision === SB 1047 would have required developers, beginning January 1, 2026, to annually retain a third-party auditor to perform an independent audit of compliance with the requirements of the bill, as provided. The Government Operations Agency would have reviewed the results of safety tests and incidents, and issue guidance, standards, and best practices. The bill would have created a Board of Frontier Models to supervise the application of the bill by the Government Operations Agency. It is would be composed of 9 members. == Reception == === Subjects of debate === Proponents of the bill described its provisions as simple and narrowly focused, with Sen. Scott Weiner describing it as a "light-touch, basic safety bill". This was disputed by critics of the bill, who described the bill's language as vague and criticized it as consolidating power in the largest AI companies at the expense of smaller ones. Proponents, in turn, argued that the bill only applies to models trained using more than 1026 FLOPS and with over $100 million, or fine-tuned with more than $10 million, and that the threshold could be increased if needed. The penalty of perjury was also a subject of debate, and was eventually removed through an amendment. The scope of the "kill switch" requirement was also reduced, following concerns from open-source developers. The use of the term "reasonable assurance" in the bill was also controversial, and it was eventually amended to "reasonable care". Critics then argued that "reasonable care" imposed an excessive burden by requiring confidence that models could not be used to cause catastrophic harm; proponents claimed that the standard did not require certainty and that it already applied to AI developers under existing law. === Support and opposition === Individual supporters of the bill included Turing Award recipients Yoshua Bengio and Geoffrey Hinton, Elon Musk, Bill de Blasio, Kevin Esvelt, Dan Hendrycks, Vitalik Buterin, OpenAI whistleblowers Daniel Kokotajlo and William Saunders, Lawrence Lessig, Sneha Revanur, Stuart Russell, Jan Leike, actors Mark Ruffalo, Sean Astin, and Rosie Perez, Scott Aaronson, and Max Tegmark. Over 120 Hollywood celebrities, including Mark Hamill, Jane Fonda, and J. J. Abrams, also signed a statement in support of the bill. Max Tegmark likened the bill's focus on holding companies responsible for the harms caused by their models to the FDA requiring clinical trials before a company can release a drug to the market. Organizations sponsoring the bill included the Center for AI Safety, Economic Security California and Encode. The la
Universal IR Evaluation
In computer science, Universal IR Evaluation (information retrieval evaluation) aims to develop measures of database retrieval performance that shall be comparable across all information retrieval tasks. == Measures of "relevance" == IR (information retrieval) evaluation begins whenever a user submits a query (search term) to a database. If the user is able to determine the relevance of each document in the database (relevant or not relevant), then for each query, the complete set of documents is naturally divided into four distinct (mutually exclusive) subsets: relevant documents that are retrieved, not relevant documents that are retrieved, relevant documents that are not retrieved, and not relevant documents that are not retrieved. These four subsets (of documents) are denoted by the letters a, b, c, d respectively and are called Swets variables, named after their inventor. In addition to the Swets definitions, four relevance metrics have also been defined: Recall refers to the fraction of relevant documents that are retrieved (a/(a+b)), and Precision refers to the fraction of retrieved documents that are relevant (a/(a+c)). These are the most commonly used and well-known relevance metrics found in the IR evaluation literature. Two less commonly used metrics include the Fallout, i.e., the fraction of not relevant documents that are retrieved (b/(b+d)), and the Miss, which refers to the fraction of relevant documents that are not retrieved (c/(c+d)) during any given search. == Universal IR evaluation techniques == Universal IR evaluation addresses the mathematical possibilities and relationships among the four relevance metrics Precision, Recall, Fallout and Miss, denoted by P, R, F and M, respectively. One aspect of the problem involves finding a mathematical derivation of a complete set of universal IR evaluation points. The complete set of 16 points, each one a quadruple of the form (P, R, F, M), describes all the possible universal IR outcomes. For example, many of us have had the experience of querying a database and not retrieving any documents at all. In this case, the Precision would take on the undetermined form 0/0, the Recall and Fallout would both be zero, and the Miss would be any value greater than zero and less than one (assuming a mix of relevant and not relevant documents were in the database, none of which were retrieved). This universal IR evaluation point would thus be denoted by (0/0, 0, 0, M), which represents only one of the 16 possible universal IR outcomes. The mathematics of universal IR evaluation is a fairly new subject since the relevance metrics P, R, F, M were not analyzed collectively until recently (within the past decade). A lot of the theoretical groundwork has already been formulated, but new insights in this area await discovery.
Cryptographic Module Testing Laboratory
Cryptographic Module Testing Laboratory (CMTL) is an information technology (IT) computer security testing laboratory that is accredited to conduct cryptographic module evaluations for conformance to the FIPS 140-2 U.S. Government standard. The National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST) National Voluntary Laboratory Accreditation Program (NVLAP) accredits CMTLs to meet Cryptographic Module Validation Program (CMVP) standards and procedures. This has been replaced by FIPS 140-2 and the Cryptographic Module Validation Program (CMVP). == CMTL requirements == These laboratories must meet the following requirements: NIST Handbook 150, NVLAP Procedures and General Requirements NIST Handbook 150-17 Information Technology Security Testing - Cryptographic Module Testing NVLAP Specific Operations Checklist for Cryptographic Module Testing == FIPS 140-2 in relation to the Common Criteria == A CMTL can also be a Common Criteria (CC) Testing Laboratory (CCTL). The CC and FIPS 140-2 are different in the abstractness and focus of evaluation. FIPS 140-2 testing is against a defined cryptographic module and provides a suite of conformance tests to four FIPS 140 security levels. FIPS 140-2 describes the requirements for cryptographic modules and includes such areas as physical security, key management, self tests, roles and services, etc. The standard was initially developed in 1994 - prior to the development of the CC. The CC is an evaluation against a Protection Profile (PP), or security target (ST). Typically, a PP covers a broad range of products. A CC evaluation does not supersede or replace a validation to either FIPS 140-1, FIPS140-2 or FIPS 140-3. The four security levels in FIPS 140-1 and FIPS 140-2 do not map directly to specific CC EALs or to CC functional requirements. A CC certificate cannot be a substitute for a FIPS 140-1 or FIPS 140-2 certificate. If the operational environment is a modifiable operational environment, the operating system requirements of the Common Criteria are applicable at FIPS Security Levels 2 and above. FIPS 140-1 required evaluated operating systems that referenced the Trusted Computer System Evaluation Criteria (TCSEC) classes C2, B1 and B2. However, TCSEC is no longer in use and has been replaced by the Common Criteria. Consequently, FIPS 140-2 now references the Common Criteria. FIPS 140-2 or FIPS 140-3 validation efforts can be in some parts reused in Common Criteria evaluations, specifically in areas related to entropy source and cryptographic algorithms.
Social media use in the financial services sector
Social media in the financial services sector refers to the use of social media by the financial services sector to promote and distribute financial services. Social media is used in various aspects of the financial industry including customer service, marketing, and product development. It has enabled financial institutions to extend their reach through direct and real-time communication with customers, fostering more personal connections. It also allows individuals to talk to other individuals creating lending and trading via social groups as well as developing new financial services by fintech startup companies. In terms of marketing, social media is utilized by both traditional financial companies as well as disruptive fintech companies such as peer-to-peer lending (P2P) companies. The financial industry has used information technology since its inception in the 1960s and social media fits in with this ongoing development. Larger, traditional financial firms have integrated social media into their marketing strategies. Companies in the financial sector are subject to strict regulations that include how they use social media. In the United States, the Financial Industry Regulatory Authority (FINRA) is a key regulator that sets rules how financial firms can interact with consumers. This includes ensuring that social media posts follow financial advertising rules, such as being fair and balanced and not providing misleading information, and that financial advice is not provided by unqualified personnel, such as influencers. == History == In 2003, at the beginning of social media development, MySpace was founded as a "social networking service." It allowed people to create a profile, connect with other people, and post videos, pictures, and songs. As MySpace grew in popularity, it attracted interest from companies wishing to promote their brands on the social platform. They were joined by Facebook and in 2010 by Instagram. Financial service firms were initially slow to adapt to promotion via social media but soon joined other big firms after they saw the success other industries had in engaging with younger people. == Uses == === Branding === While companies are able to connect with more people remotely through providing online financial services, their branding strategy has shifted from customized to standardized. Prior to the outbreak of technology, most banks used customized branding where they targeted only customers in their regions. Businesses can now use technology to operate beyond their geographic location and maintain a consistent image across multiple countries with standardized branding. By being able to extend a consistent brand reputation across a wider geographic location, financial services companies can take advantage of economies of scale in advertising cost, lower administrative complexity, lower entry into new markets, and improved cross-border learning within the company. === Customer engagement === Online banking reduced face-to-face interaction between customers and their banks. Most banking transactions can now be conducted online or through mobile devices, rather than at a local branch with a teller. Social media provides a channel for firms to maintain personal contact with customers, replicating some of the interaction that was previously available at local branches. For example, a bank's Facebook page may feature an employee profile describing their job duties, which serves to present a more human face for larger institutions. === Lending === Social media is a core marketing channel for online peer-to-peer lending as well as small business lenders. Since these companies operate exclusively online, it makes sense for them to market online through social media channels. They are able to grow and find new lenders and buyers by utilizing social networks. === Trading === Social trading is an alternative way of analyzing financial data by looking at what other traders are doing and comparing, copying and discussing their techniques and strategies. Prior to the advent of social trading, investors and traders were relying on fundamental or technical analysis to form their investment decisions. Using social trading investors and traders could integrate into their investment decision-process social indicators from trading data-feeds of other traders. Investors also use platform like Reddit, Signal messaging or WeChat to create social communities to discuss investments and finance. In some cases they use this to join together using meme stocks to move financial markets, such as the 2021 GameStop short squeeze incident. They can also use social groups to launch and promote new products such as cryptocurrencies. Investing application like WeBull incorporate a forum style messaging system on each stock that is available for trading. Financial brokers such as Fidelity Investments, Interactive Brokers, and E-Trade have moved to incorporate community features in their investment apps. == Regulations == The use of social media by investors and financial services professionals for business purposes is subject to regulatory oversight, in the United States this is done primarily by the Financial Industry Regulatory Authority (FINRA). FINRA's rules, designed to protect investors from misleading information in all communications and this also applies to social media communications. This includes ensuring that social media posts follow financial advertising rules, such as being fair and balanced and not providing misleading information, and that advice is not provided by unqualified personnel, such as influencers and bank staff acting in a personal capacity. Financial firms have to maintain books and records of all interaction with customers and this includes social media. == New products and services == Social media has created entirely new products for the financial services sector, revolutionizing products and developing new industries through the merging of social technology and financial services. Fintech startups use social media to promote products to get them established. Several developing nations have used social media to leapfrog traditional financial technology; for example, WeChat Pay, which developed from the Chinese WeChat social media platform, became a major payment system in China within a few years. In 2015, according to consulting firm Accenture, 390 million people in China had registered to use mobile banking. This figure is more than the population of the United States. In the United States, the fintech company Venmo combines technology and financial services on a social platform. Other financial technology companies that have used social media to develop or promote financial products include: Lending Club – One of the first peer-to-peer lending businesses OnDeck Capital – A US online-only lending business Funding Circle – A UK-based online lending company Wise – A global online money transfers company Kabbage – A US online unsecured loan company later acquired by American Express Avant – A US online unsecured loan company Zopa – A UK online neobank providing peer-to-peer lending == Risks == === Reputational damage === Due to the real-time nature of social media, financial services companies can be impacted by potential reputational issues. Any negative experience by customers can easily be shared online and could become a viral phenomenon, those comments could likely have a detrimental effect on the company’s stock price and reputation. On the other hand, any positive experience a customer has can also be shared online. However, positive experiences are much less likely to become viral. === Scams === The nature of social media makes it easy to target individuals without being seen by the wider community, this allows scammers to target individuals. Example include romance scams such as the pig butchering scam where an individual is tricked to transfer funds or assets to the scammer over social media making it hard for law enforcement to track them or recover funds. === Customer privacy === Customer privacy is important for the financial services industry. It is critical that customer information such as a bank account numbers and other personal information is kept private. However, this information can be leaked if for example, a customer is unhappy with a bank’s service, they may tweet at the bank expressing their frustrations and include their name and account number.
Cut, copy, and paste
Cut, copy, and paste are essential commands of modern human–computer interaction and user interface design. They offer an interprocess communication technique for transferring data through a computer's user interface. The cut command removes the selected data from its original position, and the copy command creates a duplicate; in both cases the selected data is kept in temporary storage called the clipboard. Clipboard data is later inserted wherever a paste command is issued. The data remains available to any application supporting the feature, thus allowing easy data transfer between applications. The command names are a (skeuomorphic) interface metaphor based on the physical procedure used in manuscript print editing to create a page layout, like with paper. The commands were pioneered into computing by Xerox PARC in 1974, popularized by Apple Computer in the 1983 Lisa workstation and the 1984 Macintosh computer, and in a few home computer applications such as the 1984 word processor Cut & Paste. This interaction technique has close associations with related techniques in graphical user interfaces (GUIs) that use pointing devices such as a computer mouse (by drag and drop, for example). Typically, clipboard support is provided by an operating system as part of its GUI and widget toolkit. The capability to replicate information with ease, changing it between contexts and applications, involves privacy concerns because of the risks of disclosure when handling sensitive information. Terms like cloning, copy forward, carry forward, or re-use refer to the dissemination of such information through documents, and may be subject to regulation by administrative bodies. == History == === Origins === The term "cut and paste" comes from the traditional practice in manuscript editing, whereby people cut paragraphs from a page with scissors and paste them onto another page. This practice remained standard into the 1980s. Stationery stores sold "editing scissors" with blades long enough to cut an 8½"-wide page. The advent of photocopiers made the practice easier and more flexible. The act of copying or transferring text from one part of a computer-based document ("buffer") to a different location within the same or different computer-based document was a part of the earliest on-line computer editors. As soon as computer data entry moved from punch-cards to online files (in the mid/late 1960s) there were "commands" for accomplishing this operation. This mechanism was often used to transfer frequently-used commands or text snippets from additional buffers into the document, as was the case with the QED text editor. === Early methods === The earliest editors (designed for teleprinter terminals) provided keyboard commands to delineate a contiguous region of text, then delete or move it. Since moving a region of text requires first removing it from its initial location and then inserting it into its new location, various schemes had to be invented to allow for this multi-step process to be specified by the user. Often this was done with a "move" command, but some text editors required that the text be first put into some temporary location for later retrieval/placement. In 1983, the Apple Lisa became the first text editing system to call that temporary location "the clipboard". Earlier control schemes such as NLS used a verb—object command structure, where the command name was provided first and the object to be copied or moved was second. The inversion from verb—object to object—verb on which copy and paste are based, where the user selects the object to be operated before initiating the operation, was an innovation crucial for the success of the desktop metaphor as it allowed copy and move operations based on direct manipulation. === Popularization === Inspired by early line and character editors, such as Pentti Kanerva's TV-Edit, that broke a move or copy operation into two steps—between which the user could invoke a preparatory action such as navigation—Lawrence G. "Larry" Tesler proposed the names "cut" and "copy" for the first step and "paste" for the second step. Beginning in 1974, he and colleagues at Xerox PARC implemented several text editors that used cut/copy-and-paste commands to move and copy text. Apple Computer popularized this paradigm with its Lisa (1983) and Macintosh (1984) operating systems and applications. The functions were mapped to key combinations using the ⌘ Command key as a special modifier, which is held down while also pressing X for cut, C for copy, or V for paste. These few keyboard shortcuts allow the user to perform all the basic editing operations, and the keys are clustered at the left end of the bottom row of the standard QWERTY keyboard. These are the standard shortcuts: Control-Z (or ⌘ Command+Z) to undo Control-X (or ⌘ Command+X) to cut Control-C (or ⌘ Command+C) to copy Control-V (or ⌘ Command+V) to paste The IBM Common User Access (CUA) standard also uses combinations of the Insert, Del, Shift and Control keys. Early versions of Windows used the IBM standard. Microsoft later also adopted the Apple key combinations with the introduction of Windows, using the control key as modifier key. Similar patterns of key combinations, later borrowed by others, are widely available in most GUI applications. The original cut, copy, and paste workflow, as implemented at PARC, utilizes a unique workflow: With two windows on the same screen, the user could use the mouse to pick a point at which to make an insertion in one window (or a segment of text to replace). Then, by holding shift and selecting the copy source elsewhere on the same screen, the copy would be made as soon as the shift was released. Similarly, holding shift and control would copy and cut (delete) the source. This workflow requires many fewer keystrokes/mouse clicks than the current multi-step workflows, and did not require an explicit copy buffer. It was dropped, one presumes, because the original Apple and IBM GUIs were not high enough density to permit multiple windows, as were the PARC machines, and so multiple simultaneous windows were rarely used. == Cut and paste == Computer-based editing can involve very frequent use of cut-and-paste operations. Most software-suppliers provide several methods for performing such tasks, and this can involve (for example) key combinations, pulldown menus, pop-up menus, or toolbar buttons. The user selects or "highlights" the text or file for moving by some method, typically by dragging over the text or file name with the pointing-device or holding down the Shift key while using the arrow keys to move the text cursor. The user performs a "cut" operation via key combination Ctrl+x (⌘+x for Macintosh users), menu, or other means. Visibly, "cut" text immediately disappears from its location. "Cut" files typically change color to indicate that they will be moved. Conceptually, the text has now moved to a location often called the clipboard. The clipboard typically remains invisible. On most systems only one clipboard location exists, hence another cut or copy operation overwrites the previously stored information. Many UNIX text-editors provide multiple clipboard entries, as do some Macintosh programs such as Clipboard Master, and Windows clipboard-manager programs such as the one in Microsoft Office. The user selects a location for insertion by some method, typically by clicking at the desired insertion point. A paste operation takes place which visibly inserts the clipboard text at the insertion point. (The paste operation does not typically destroy the clipboard text: it remains available in the clipboard and the user can insert additional copies at other points). Whereas cut-and-paste often takes place with a mouse-equivalent in Windows-like GUI environments, it may also occur entirely from the keyboard, especially in UNIX text editors, such as Pico or vi. Cutting and pasting without a mouse can involve a selection (for which Ctrl+x is pressed in most graphical systems) or the entire current line, but it may also involve text after the cursor until the end of the line and other more sophisticated operations. The clipboard usually stays invisible, because the operations of cutting and pasting, while actually independent, usually take place in quick succession, and the user (usually) needs no assistance in understanding the operation or maintaining mental context. Some application programs provide a means of viewing, or sometimes even editing, the data on the clipboard. == Copy and paste == The term "copy-and-paste" refers to the popular, simple method of reproducing text or other data from a source to a destination. It differs from cut and paste in that the original source text or data does not get deleted or removed. The popularity of this method stems from its simplicity and the ease with which users can move data between various applications visually – without resorting to permanent storage. Use in healthcare do
Flexidraw
Flexidraw is a 1985 graphics computer program published by Inkwell Systems. == Gameplay == Flexidraw is a graphics program that allows users to produce drawings using a light pen and print them. == Reception == Roy Wagner reviewed the product for Computer Gaming World, and stated that "Of the many graphics programs available Flexidraw is certainly the best supported by it's [sic] parent company."
Storyful
Storyful (stylized as storyful.) is a social media intelligence company headquartered in Dublin, Ireland that is a subsidiary of News Corp, offering services such as social news monitoring, video licensing, and reputation risk management tools for corporate clients. The startup was launched as the first social media newswire, a content aggregator, verifying news sources and online content in Dublin in 2010 by Mark Little, a former journalist with RTÉ News. Storyful was acquired by News Corp in 2013 for USD$25 million. == Background == Mark Little, who had worked as a television journalist for RTÉ One, founded startup Storyful in Dublin, Ireland, in 2010, as a service that "verified news sources and online content". According to Nieman Lab, Storyful had a reputation for content aggregation as a social news agency—finding, verifying, distributing, licensing, and commercializing user-generated content, social media and online content from social networking services, including videos about stories in the news, such as the Syrian Civil War, Arab Spring protests, as well as "smaller viral moments". Storyful aimed to provide authority through its verification and monitoring tools while providing authenticity through user-generated content. On 20 December 2013 News Corp purchased Storyful for US$25 million and opened a New York office in the same building as Fox News' main studios. Little left Storyful in 2015 and Gavin Sheridan, Storyful's director of innovation left in 2014. News Corp CEO Robert Thomson said that through Storyful, News Corp would "define the opportunities that the digital landscape presents, rather than simply adapt to them." After the acquisition, the company expanded its service to include "commercial and creative work". After Murdoch acquired the company, from 2014 through to February 2018, losses "swelled", requiring a series of cash injections from News Corp. During that time the company expanded aggressively globally with a staff of about 200 worldwide up from about 30 in 2014. According to The Guardian, in 2016, journalists were encouraged by Storyful to use the social media monitoring software called Verify developed by Storyful. By installing Verify's web browser extension on their computers, Verify would inform the journalists when social media content had been "verified and cleared". The Guardian revealed that through the Verify plugin, dozens of staff in four offices had access to the journalists browsing activity without them knowing. This data allowed Storyful to actively monitor its own clients' activities on social media and to "turn it into an internal feed" at Storyful that "updates in real time". In November 2018, when a video circulated by Infowars' Paul Joseph Watson appeared to prove that CNN's Jim Acosta's contact with a White House intern was a physical blow, Storyful was able to prove that the 15-second-long clip had been doctored. According to a 21 January 2019 article in CNN Business, Rob McDonagh, the editor of Storyful's U.S. news team, had proven that one of the viral videos that served as catalysts in the January 2019 Lincoln Memorial confrontation at 18 January 2019 Indigenous Peoples March, was posted by a suspicious account, under the handle @2020fight. McDonagh's team validates videos and posts before adding them to their "digest", distinguishing true stories from those that are not. Storyful attempts to validate each post or video before including it in its digest. McDonagh reviewed previous content from @2020fight's account, and found it suspicious because it had a high follower count, a "highly polarized and yet inconsistent political messaging", an "unusually high rate of tweets", and "the use of someone else's image in the profile photo." reporter Donie O'Sullivan said that the @2020fight video that had been posted on 18 January, which had 2.5 million views by 22 January, was the one that "helped frame the news cycle". Currently the website offers a service by which video can be commercially brokered. == Services == Services include a newswire service—one of their "core pillars"—and social news monitoring. By February 2018, Storyful was developing "risk and reputation monitoring" services through which they would source and verify social news, fact-checking it and contextualising it for corporate clients. They were "developing tech tools" to "explore obscure or closed networks" for their intelligence team. can use to explore obscure or closed networks. They "track deviations in social conversations around brands and organisations and catch potential risks before they blow up. Like an alerts system." The company "released a re-booted version of its Newswire platform in 2018. According to FORA, Storyful was developing new tools to combat fake news online. == Clients == When Storyful was acquired by News Corp in 2013, the company already had the Wall Street Journal, the BBC, New York Times, YouTube, ITN and Channel 4 News as clients. By 2018 their clients included CNN, ABC News and Fox News, The New York Times, the Washington Post, in the United States, the Australian Broadcasting Corporation and all of News Corp’s own publications. Most of their "reputation-conscious corporate customers" clients prefer to not be named.