Latest news with #YouTube
The Star
26 minutes ago
- Politics
- The Star
Term for Sabah assembly starts on first day of sitting, automatic dissolution on Nov 11, says Speaker
KOTA KINABALU: The 16th Sabah State Legislative Assembly will be automatically dissolved on Nov 11 this year – if it is not dissolved earlier, says Speaker Datuk Seri Kadzim M. Yahya. He said the five-year term 16th Sabah State Assembly is calculated from the date of first sitting on Nov 12, 2020, making Nov 11, 2025, the end of the term. He noted that there is some misunderstanding over the date the assembly will automatically dissolve, with some assuming the term began on polling day of the 16th Sabah Election on Sept 26, 2020, or on Sept 22 for early voting. "There are outsiders who misunderstand the dissolution date. Some count from polling day, others think it starts from the date the elected representatives were sworn in (Oct 9, 2020). "(In fact) it (the five-year term of the Sabah assembly) is not counted from the polling day, the announcement of the election results, or the swearing-in of assemblymen. It is counted from the date of the first sitting of the new legislative term," he told Bernama. Kadzim said if the assembly dissolves automatically on Nov 11, Sabah Yang di-Pertua Negeri Tun Musa Aman and the Election Commission (EC) would be formally notified of the matter. "An election for the state must then be held within 60 days from the date of dissolution," he added. Commenting on the upcoming Sabah State Assembly sitting scheduled for two days starting on Monday (July 7), he said four Bills would be tabled, covering supplementary supply, state sales tax, forestry, and climate change and carbon governance. "We normally have at least three sittings a year, so (this time) there's more attention because if the State Assembly dissolves after this, it will be the final sitting of the term. If not, it will be the third sitting this year. Nothing out of the ordinary this time, just a regular sitting," he said. Kadzim also said that broadcasting the Sabah assembly sitting live on social media, including YouTube, enables the public to follow debates, especially those concerning state policies, without needing to attend in person. "I think it's better for people to watch it live because our focus is solely on the debates... there are many benefits to live broadcasts," he said. He added that the live telecast also encourages assemblymen to maintain decorum and proper conduct during proceedings, and ensures quality debates as they are aware they are being observed by the public. "If I were an assemblyman, I'd also be more disciplined, knowing that I'm being followed live by the public. The good thing is, the coverage will be wider since not everyone can come to the assembly," he said. He stressed that the Sabah State Assembly building is gazetted as a security zone and therefore certain restrictions must be adhered to in the surrounding area to avoid it becoming an uncomfortable environment for official matters. "It's not that we're stopping people from coming but we don't want the assembly to feel like a convention centre with crowds swarming around. Since the area is already gazetted as a security zone, there are limits – please observe them," he said. When asked about the use of artificial intelligence (AI), Kadzim said they have not yet been able to fully utilise the technology due to some limitations, especially regarding language translation. "If one day AI can be used for legislative sittings, we could use it to assist in our work, including producing the Hansards and so forth," he said. – Bernama
New Straits Times
31 minutes ago
- Politics
- New Straits Times
Sabah state assembly to dissolve automatically on Nov 11
KOTA KINABALU: The 16th Sabah State Legislative Assembly will be automatically dissolved on Nov 11 this year if it is not dissolved earlier, said Speaker Datuk Seri Kadzim M Yahya. He said the five-year term of the assembly is calculated from the date of the first sitting of the 16th Sabah State Assembly, which was on Nov 12, 2020, making Nov 11 this year the end of the term. He noted that there is some public misunderstanding regarding the date the assembly will automatically dissolve, with some assuming the term began on the polling day of the 16th Sabah State Election on Sept 26, 2020, or on Sept 22 for early voting. "There are outsiders who misunderstand the dissolution date. Some count from polling day, others think it starts from the date the elected representatives were sworn in (Oct 9, 2020). "(In fact) it (the five-year term of the Sabah assembly) is not counted from the polling day, the announcement of the election results, or the swearing-in of assemblymen. "It is counted from the date of the first sitting of the new legislative term," he said. Kadzim said if the assembly dissolves automatically on Nov 11, Sabah Yang Dipertua Negeri Tun Musa Aman and the Election Commission (EC) would be formally notified of the matter. "An election for the state must then be held within 60 days from the date of dissolution," he added. Commenting on the upcoming Sabah State Assembly sitting scheduled for two days starting tomorrow, he said four bills will be tabled, covering supplementary supply, state sales tax, forestry, and climate change and carbon governance. "We normally have at least three sittings a year, so (this time) there's more attention because if the State Assembly dissolves after this, it will be the final sitting of the term. "If not, it will be the third sitting this year. Nothing out of the ordinary this time, just a regular sitting," he said. Kadzim also said that broadcasting the Sabah assembly sitting live on social media, including YouTube, enables the public to follow debates, especially those concerning state policies, without needing to attend in person. "I think it's better for people to watch it live because our focus is solely on the debates... there are many benefits to live broadcasts," he said. He added that the live telecast also encourages assemblymen to maintain decorum and proper conduct during proceedings, and ensures quality debates as they are aware they are being observed by the public. "If I were an assemblyman, I'd also be more disciplined, knowing that I'm being followed live by the public. "The good thing is, the coverage will be wider since not everyone can come to the assembly," he said. He stressed that the Sabah State Assembly building is gazetted as a security zone, and therefore, certain restrictions must be adhered to in the surrounding area to avoid it becoming an uncomfortable environment for official matters. "It's not that we're stopping people from coming, but we don't want the assembly to feel like a convention centre with crowds swarming around. Since the area is already gazetted as a security zone, there are limits – please observe them," he said. When asked about the use of artificial intelligence (AI), Kadzim said they have not yet been able to fully utilise the technology due to some limitations, especially regarding language translation. "If one day AI can be used for legislative sittings, we could use it to assist in our work, including producing the Hansard and so forth," he said. — BERNAMA
New Indian Express
31 minutes ago
- Politics
- New Indian Express
BBMP spends Rs 1.48 crore on caste survey so far, Rs 70L on stickers alone...
BENGALURU: Has BBMP spent a whopping Rs 1.48 crore on the survey of SC population in its limits so far? Yes, according to sources in the Palike. It has spent Rs 70 lakh on stickers alone and Rs 28 lakh on raising awareness on the survey through social media platforms. According to Suralkar Vikas Kishore, nodal officer, the projected estimation for stickers, distribution of pamphlets and engaging workers is Rs 1.75 crore. The survey cost may touch Rs 3 crore by the time it is completed. BBMP has launched an elaborate campaign to raise awareness on the survey of SC population through street plays, short films, social media, IEC and other platforms, Kishore said. Sources in the BBMP said that it cost Rs 28 lakh to register 60 lakh views for its two short films on Facebook, YouTube, Instagram and other social media platforms. 'Including 18% GST, the palike's spending will be around Rs 49,56,000. It cost Rs 12 lakh to the Palike to hire a camera, cameraman, scriptwriters, voice-over artistes and music,' according to a source. However, many have expressed their reservation over the genuineness of the survey, going by the manner in which it is being conducted and money spent. In many places, enumerators have pasted stickers on doors without collecting details from people living in houses. Incidents of clashes between enumerators and occupants of the houses have also been reported. Seven revenue officials, who were part of the survey, have been suspended for dereliction of duty.
Time of India
40 minutes ago
- Entertainment
- Time of India
Bhagyalakshmi criticizes actor Tini Tom for ‘Baseless' remarks about Prem Nazir's final days - 'Deeply hurtful'
(Picture Courtesy: Facebook) Veteran actor and dubbing artist Bhagyalakshmi has publicly condemned actor Tini Tom for his recent claims about legendary Malayalam actor Prem Nazir . In a heartfelt video shared on social media, Bhagyalakshmi said she was disturbed by Tini's suggestion that Nazir had spent his final days 'crying at the houses of Adoor Bhasi and Bahadoor' due to lack of film opportunities. 'For those of us who worked with him in Madras till 1985, who knew him closely and experienced his generosity, this is painful,' she said. 'I personally met him shortly before his death at Edappazhanji in Thiruvananthapuram. He was happy and surrounded by his family. That was one of the most peaceful phases of his life.' "You cannot repeat everything you hear" Bhagyalakshmi stressed that public figures must exercise caution when speaking about others, especially someone of Prem Nazir's stature. 'Even if Tini heard this from someone else, he should not have repeated it without verifying the facts,' she said, calling the claim misleading and harmful. Celebrating Prem Nazir's birth anniversary She pointed out that many YouTube channels today share unverified stories about late actors for views, but it's not acceptable for someone from the industry to echo such narratives. 'Tini Tom wasn't even active in cinema when Nazir sir was alive,' she reminded, adding that such remarks discredit the truth known to those who actually spent time with the legendary actor. "Nazir sir was never that man" Bhagyalakshmi recalled how Prem Nazir would often turn down roles saying, 'Let someone else do it... call him instead.' She described him as a generous host whose Madras home was always open to fellow artists from Kerala. 'He never cried for roles. He never sought pity. To paint him as someone who begged for work in his final days is a disservice to his legacy and hurtful to his family.' Her message to Tini Tom was clear: 'If you believe that about Nazir sir, it's time to change that belief.'
Indian Express
an hour ago
- Entertainment
- Indian Express
YouTube pirates are cashing in on Hollywood's summer blockbusters
After spending about $100 million on 'Lilo & Stitch,' a live-action remake of a 2002 animated film, Disney had plenty to celebrate. The film pulled in $361 million worldwide on its opening weekend in May and bested 'Mission: Impossible — The Final Reckoning' at the box office. But the company also had cause to be concerned. In the days after the Disney film's opening, a pirated version of 'Lilo & Stitch' proved to be a hit on YouTube, where more than 200,000 people viewed it, potentially costing Disney millions of dollars in additional sales, according to research from Adalytics, a firm that analyzes advertising campaigns for brands. The findings of the research shed new light on the copyright issues that once threatened to upend YouTube's business. They also show how advertisers have unwittingly supported illicit content on YouTube, and they provide rare data about piracy on the platform. YouTube has long tried to tamp down piracy, but users who upload stolen films and television shows have employed new tactics to evade the platform's detection tools, the research showed, including cropping films and manipulating footage. YouTube then recommended the uploaded videos to users on its homepage, promoting pirated streaming of box office releases like 'Lilo & Stitch,' or movies exclusively available on streaming platforms, like 'Captain America: Brave New World,' according to screen recordings compiled by Adalytics and an analysis by The New York Times. YouTube, which is owned by Google, may also have generated revenue from some stolen videos, though it's unclear how much money it may have made. The company has a program known as Content ID to identify videos protected by copyright. It allows copyright holders to block the videos, share in advertising sales of the videos or receive data about who views the videos. Over the years, YouTube has paid billions of dollars to rights holders. YouTube reported flagging 2.2 billion videos last year and said rights holders permitted about 90% of those videos to stay on the platform. Jack Malon, a spokesperson for YouTube, said the company does not analyze the less than 10% of videos it removes at the request of copyright holders and does not track how many of those videos may be recently released, full-length movies. The channels that uploaded the videos of 'Lilo & Stitch' and 'Captain America: Brave New World' were terminated for violating YouTube's policies on spam, Malon said. He declined to say whether the company had profited from commercials shown in copyrighted videos that evaded detection by Content ID or racked up views before rights holders asked that they be taken down. At YouTube's request, Adalytics and the Times provided 200 videos for YouTube to review, most of them full-length films. YouTube analyzed the videos but declined to provide insight into what percentage of the films their rights holders had permitted to stay up or had required to be removed. 'To frame these videos as 'illicit' without first reviewing the specific choices made by each rights holder misunderstands how the media landscape on YouTube works today,' Malon said. While 'mistakes do occur' on YouTube, he said, he dismissed the Adalytics report as an effort to get companies to sign up for the firm's services. Holders of copyrights for the videos, including all the major film studios, did not respond when asked for comment by the Times. The founder of Adalytics, Krzysztof Franaszek, who conducted the research, said he had observed 9,000 examples of possible copyright violations, 'including full-length movies that were in theatrical release, Netflix exclusives such as 'Extraction 2,' TV shows such as 'Family Guy' and live NCAA college football games.' The videos collectively had more than 250 million views. More than 100 of these uploads were also reviewed by the Times. Movies from every major film studio were found on YouTube in unofficial streams uploaded from last July to May, Adalytics found. When briefed on the research findings, Larissa Knapp, the chief content protection officer of the Motion Picture Association, a trade group for movie studios, said she found them concerning. At one point, the anti-piracy work between the studios and YouTube 'did work,' Knapp said. 'But now it seems like some of the stuff may have gone off the rails if illegal content is being placed with ads.' The research recalled a time in YouTube's history when Hollywood accused the platform of profiting from its stolen content. In 2007, Viacom sued YouTube, claiming it engaged in 'brazen' copyright infringement by allowing uploads of the media company's material without its permission. In 2012, YouTube won the suit by arguing it was shielded from liability by the 1998 Digital Millennium Copyright Act, which exempted YouTube from liability for hosting copyrighted work. The law shifted the burden for protecting a copyright from the platform and video creators to rights holders, said Eric Goldman, a law professor at Santa Clara University. Without the rule, he said, 'the internet would not be able to exist in its existing format.' YouTube has tried to work with film studios, television networks and streaming services to combat piracy. Google, YouTube's parent company, developed its Content ID technology to recognize copyrighted videos, and YouTube became more aggressive at policing its platform for piracy. Copyright holders gained the right to either have the content removed or collect a share of the advertising revenue the videos generated. The box office in the United States and Canada routinely loses $1 billion each year to piracy, which is roughly 15% of its annual haul, according to the Alliance for Creativity and Entertainment, a trade group of 50 entertainment companies that tries to reduce piracy. Franaszek began the research after his advertising clients noticed that as much as 60% of their ad spending on YouTube went to videos or channels that were labeled 'no longer available.' After digging deeper, he found that his clients had paid to support content that YouTube later removed because it violated company policies against nudity, violence or hate speech, or because of other offenses. When videos are removed from the platform, YouTube scrubs advertisers' records so that they can no longer see the name of the video. Advertisers have to go to the link for the removed video to see if it was removed for a copyright violation, Franaszek said. He added that the platform did not fully reimburse the advertisers for the cost of commercials in those videos. Erich Garcia, a senior vice president at which lets consumers compare insurance offerings, said his company's ads routinely ran with videos that had disappeared, limiting his insight into the effectiveness of his promotions. Malon said YouTube advertisers could get more insight into those videos by asking their account representatives for more information. Representatives can provide advertising credits. Ads from Disney, Hulu, HBO Max, Focus Features and dozens of other companies from various industries were found alongside unauthorized film and television uploads, Adalytics said. Pirates deployed a range of deceptive tactics to evade YouTube's anti-piracy algorithms. Some uploaded and voluntarily removed copyrighted videos on the same day, racking up viewers before being caught. Other pirates mirrored the videos to reverse the images, or cropped the frames in an effort to trick the Content ID system. Still others placed clips of regular people at the end of a Hollywood blockbuster video to further cover their tracks, Adalytics and the Times found. Franaszek said Adalytics clients who paid for advertising in videos that were removed over copyright issues had a simple request: 'to have visibility into what content their YouTube ad dollars are funding, and where their ads appear.'
