# data[].attributes.body
Nowadays, you can get the information on the internet. If you want to know more about somebody or something, you just need to visit the search engines and search for the content that you want. (explain)

# data[].attributes.body
If you have assignments, you can get the information that you need from the internet. (example)

# data[].attributes.body
It has made learning easier. (Point)

# data[].attributes.body
Thus, technology helps us to communicate with our friends and family members easily (explain)

# data[].attributes.body
In the past, we had to to write a letters instead .The recipient would then have to wait for days and even months to recieve it. Now, people can text ecah other or email important messages to colleagues and relatives. (example)

# data[].attributes.body
Communication has become much more easier and convenient (point)

# data[].attributes.body
Technology brings us more convenient such as...

# data[].attributes.body
1.The application of scientific knowledge for practical purposes,especially in industry.
2.Machinary and equipment developed from the application of scientific knowledge.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
WASHINGTON (AFP) - The unique features of your face can allow you to unlock your new iPhone, access your bank account or even "smile to pay" for some goods and services.

The same technology, using algorithms generated by a facial scan, can allow law enforcement to find a wanted person in a crowd or match the image of someone in police custody to a database of known offenders.

Facial recognition came into play last month (June) when a suspect arrested for a shooting at a newsroom in Annapolis, Maryland, refused to cooperate with police and could not immediately be identified using fingerprints.

"We would have been much longer in identifying him and being able to push forward in the investigation without that system," said Anne Arundel County police chief Timothy Altomare.

Facial recognition is playing an increasing role in law enforcement, border security and other purposes in the United States and around the world.

While most observers acknowledge the merits of some uses of this biometric identification, the technology evokes fears of a "Big Brother" surveillance state.

Heightening those concerns are studies showing facial recognition may not always be accurate, especially for people of colour.

A 2016 Georgetown University study found that one in two American adults, or 117 million people, are in facial recognition databases with few rules on how these systems may be accessed.

A growing fear for civil liberties activists is that law enforcement will deploy facial recognition in "real time" through drones, body cameras and dash cams.

"The real concern is police on patrol identifying law-abiding Americans at will with body cameras," said Mr Matthew Feeney, specialist in emerging technologies at the Cato Institute, a libertarian think tank.

"This technology is of course improving but it's not as accurate as science fiction films would make you think."

China is at the forefront of facial recognition, using the technology to fine traffic violators and shame jaywalkers, with at least one arrest of a criminal suspect.

Ms Clare Garvie, lead author of the 2016 Georgetown study, said that in the past two years, "facial recognition has been deployed in a more widespread and aggressive manner" in the US, including for border security and at least one international airport.

News that Amazon had begun deploying its Rekognition software to police departments sparked a wave of protests from employees and activists calling on the tech giant to stay away from law enforcement applications.

Amazon is one of dozens of tech firms involved in facial recognition. Microsoft, for example, uses facial recognition for US border security, and the US state of Maryland uses technology from German-based Cognitec and Japanese tech firm NEC.

Amazon maintains that it does not conduct surveillance or provide any data to law enforcement, but simply enables them to match images to those in its databases.

The tech giant also claims its facial recognition system can help reunite lost or abducted children with their families and stem human trafficking.

Nonetheless, some say facial recognition should not be deployed by law enforcement because of the potential for errors and abuse.

That was an argument made by Mr Brian Brackeen, founder and the chief executive officer of the facial recognition software developer Kairos.

"As the black chief executive of a software company developing facial recognition services, I have a personal connection to the technology, both culturally and socially," Mr Brackeen said in a blog post on TechCrunch.

"Facial recognition-powered government surveillance is an extraordinary invasion of the privacy of all citizens - and a slippery slope to losing control of our identities altogether."

The Georgetown study found facial recognition algorithms were five to 10 per cent less accurate on African Americans than Caucasians.

Microsoft announced last month it had made significant improvements for facial recognition "across skin tones" and genders.

IBM, meanwhile, said it was launching a large-scale study "to improve the understanding of bias in facial analysis".

While more accurate facial recognition is generally welcomed, civil liberties groups say specific policy safeguards should be in place.

In 2015, several consumer groups dropped out of a government-private initiative to develop standards for facial recognition use, claiming the process was unlikely to develop sufficient privacy protections.

Cato Institute's Mr Feeney said a meaningful move would be to "purge these databases of anyone who isn't currently incarcerated or wanted for violent crime".

Ms Jennifer Lynch, an attorney with the Electronic Frontier Foundation, said that the implications for police surveillance are significant.

"An inaccurate system will implicate people for crimes they did not commit. And it will shift the burden onto defendants to show they are not who the system says they are," Ms Lynch said in a report earlier this year.

She said there are unique risks of breach or misuse of this data, because "we can't change our faces".

Philosophy professor Evan Selinger from the Rochester Institute of Technology said facial recognition is too dangerous for law enforcement.

"It's an ideal tool for oppressive surveillance," Prof Selinger said in a blog post. "It poses such a severe threat in the hands of law enforcement that the problem cannot be contained by imposing procedural safeguards."

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
As facial recognition use grows in border security, law enforcement, so do privacy fears

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
WASHINGTON (AFP) - The unique features of your face can allow you to unlock your new iPhone, access your bank account or even "smile to pay" for some goods and services. The same technology, using algorithms generated by a facial scan, can allow law enforcement to find a wanted person in a crowd or match the image of someone in police custody to a database of known offenders.

# data[].attributes.body
Over relying on technology can result in us being too dependent on technology. What happens if technology breaks down one day? Will you be able to cope without it?

# data[].attributes.body
A survey shows that people in Singapore spends over 12 hours over gadgets daily (Evidence)

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
Like it or not, gadgets have become a key part of people's lives in Singapore, as consumers spend most of their waking hours on digital devices - 12hr 42 min a day on average.

And spending so much time has had both a positive and a negative impact on people's lives, in areas such as their relations with others and sleep.

This is according to survey findings released in February on the impact of digital devices - such as mobile phones, tablets, computers and video game consoles - on people.

Accounting for the most time spent on a gadget in a day on average is the mobile phone, at 3hr 12min.

The top gadget people use here is also the smartphone, with 95 per cent saying so, and its effect on people is telling - almost 80 per cent of them check their smartphones when waking up in the morning or just before going to bed.

While many - nearly 30 per cent - said that their sleep has been negatively affected by mobile gadgets, a similar number said there has been a positive impact.

Even so, about 70 per cent have enjoyed a boon in communications with their friends and are better able to complete personal errands and multitask, thanks to smartphones and tablets.

The study by consultancy Ernst & Young (EY) polled 1,000 people aged 18 to 69 who resided in Singapore for at least a year and had access to the Internet.

The top online activity they engaged in using their gadgets daily was reading personal e-mails, with 90 per cent of respondents doing so.

'Do more to boost e-commerce'

Singapore may be digitally savvy but more can be done to enhance e-commerce here, a study released by Ernst & Young in February has recommended.

The study, which polled 1,000 people in Singapore last May, found that almost half - 49 per cent - do online research for a product in a store or at the point of purchase.

The top online activity they engaged in monthly or more frequently, on gadgets such as smartphones and computers, was banking and finance, with 89 per cent of people doing so.

A distant second was online grocery shopping at 47 per cent.

Some 55 per cent said they would like to be able to buy from more retailers online as well.

Ernst & Young Asean advisory digital leader Jonathan Rees said the findings show that "digital experiences are not just about online shopping and e-commerce". "For Singapore retailers, there is a significant opportunity in merging the brick-and-mortar store with digital experiences.

"What is certain is going digital is no longer a 'wait- and-see' but a 'catch-and- act-now' imperative. Organisations must be ready to reset their customer strategies if they want to successfully capitalise on the growth potential of the digital economy."
Lin Yangchen

But the heavy use of digital gadgets is not without issues.

About a third of respondents admitted that they were addicted to smartphones and tablets.

A visual merchandiser who wanted to be known only as Ms Mary O., 26, said her smartphone causes her to lose three to four hours of sleep every night.

"Most of the time, I am playing (mobile) games like Bejeweled. It gets addictive as you just want to reach the next level in the game," she said, adding that she usually sleeps at around 3am.

She uses her smartphone while commuting and at work as well. But she noted that there is a positive side as "it allows me to connect with relatives and friends overseas".

Sleep is an issue that university student Nataniel Wong, 22, faces as well. He uses his devices for about 12 hours a day: Five hours for school work and seven for browsing the Internet and social media. "This has pushed my sleep time to later in the night, usually past 2am," he said.

Housewife Linda Yeo, 54, spends five to six hours on her phone daily, but said her habit of checking her phone before turning in at 11 each night does not affect her sleep. "Even if I am not using my phone before that, I will be watching television," Madam Yeo said.

Others are affected by more physical issues. University student Gracia Ow, 20, said she uses her laptop so often that her "back and shoulders ache all the time". She added: "I use my laptop and smartphone for close to 16 hours a day. Most of the time I am doing schoolwork, but I am also on social media for around two hours."

People are generally spending way too much time on their digital devices, said Dr Michael Netzley, academic director at Singapore Management University Executive Development.

"Humans are very poor at multitasking... We all have limited mental bandwidth, and multitasking through mobile devices rapidly depletes that limited mental bandwidth," he said, adding that people would have a competitive advantage if they "power off, focus and perform at a higher level".

There are social and health consequences too, said Dr Netzley.

"We wake up throughout the night, checking our devices and damaging the quality of all-important sleep and recharging... People stare at their devices, walk wherever they want without looking and simply do not care about anyone else," he said.

To address the problem, digital discipline should be taught in workplaces, schools, places of worship and even the media, said Dr Netzley.

"The problem is not the technology. The problem is a lack of disciplined use of the technology."

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
People in Singapore spend over 12 hours on gadgets daily: Survey

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Like it or not, gadgets have become a key part of people's lives in Singapore, as consumers spend most of their waking hours on digital devices - 12hr 42 min a day on average. And spending so much time has had both a positive and a negative impact on people's lives, in areas such as their relations with others and sleep.

# data[].attributes.body
Although technology has its advantages,  it also has its disadvantages

# data[].attributes.body
The lastest advancements includes...

# data[].attributes.body
Boon or Bane