Does Instagram copy Snapchat? Insta CEO admits 'stories' similar to 'snaps'

Does Instagram copy Snapchat? Most of you will instantly agree it does but for Instagram CEO, the Facebook-owned photo-sharing app is just "building" on Snapchat.

In an interview with the Wall Street Journal on Tuesday, Kevin Systrom said that even if Snapchat had all of these features before, it doesn't mean Instagram is blatantly copying Snapchat.

Systrom endorsed that Instagram's "Stories" feature is "definitely similar" to Snapchat's version, but argued that it did not establish that they were copying.

Originally launched by Snapchat, the "Stories" feature shows photos and videos shared in chronological order that disappear after 24 hours.

Facebook introduced something similar in its app Instagram last August. Today, Instagram has over 200 million people using "Stories" daily — more than even Snapchat.

Today, Messenger, WhatsApp and the main Facebook app have all added "Stories" feature (In WhatsApp, it is called 'Status').

However, for Instagram CEO, Snapchat-Instagram battle is akin to the early days of cars, saying that more companies came along after the Model T.

"In this scenario, Instagram is simply building upon a technology that Snapchat created," Systrom was quoted as saying.

That Facebook is going after Snapchat is not news, but the battle has now become somewhat ugly.

At its recent F8 developer conference in San Jose in the US, CEO Mark Zuckerberg launched "Camera Effects Platform" to encourage augmented reality (AR) effects -- a move reported by The New York Times as Facebook's "brazen heist" over Snapchat.

"Facebook is not just learning/borrowing features from Snapchat (mostly to Instagram), but it has been borrowing features from other messaging apps too. For example, Facebook Messenger learned a lot of features from WeChat (China) since last year's F8, such as creating branded accounts and letting brands use it for customer services," Xiaofeng Wang, Senior Analyst with US-based market research firm Forrester, told IANS.
READ MORE

Babri prosecution will not be safe in CBI hands unless SC monitors its work

Last month, the Supreme Court decided that senior BJP leaders like L.K. Advani, Murli Manohar Joshi, Uma Bharti and others must be tried for the charge of conspiring to demolish the Babri Masjid and ordered that their trial in Lucknow be held on a day-to-day basis. On May 30, Advani and the others were granted bail by the trial court on sureties of Rs 20,000.

Though the Supreme Court has fixed a period of two years for the trial’s completion, this is unlikely to happen unless the apex court directly supervises matters and also monitors the role of the CBI – the prosecuting agency – during the course of the trial. The trial court can give its verdict only on the basis of the evidence placed before it and it is the CBI that will have to provide the evidence. Unfortunately, the CBI’s past record in this case does not inspire confidence about its impartiality. The investigating agency has already shown three different faces in this case, lending credence to the belief that it is a  ‘Cover-up Bureau of Investigation’. There are many instances to prove this charge and even the apex court had described the CBI as a “caged parrot”.

CBI, phase I, face 1

The role of the CBI at different stages of the Ayodhya case has been questionable. In the first trial in the court of additional sessions judge (Ayodhya episode), Lucknow, Jagdish Prasad Srivastva, the CBI went all out to put the facts in evidence for framing of charges against the accused persons including Advani, Joshi and others for delivering speeches and conspiring to demolish the Babri Masjid. In para 36 of his order dated September 9, 1997, the judge, on the basis of evidence provided by the CBI, gave details of the role of Advani and Joshi, and how they started their rath yatra. “On December 1, 1992, Advani said in Kanpur that kar sewa does not mean bhajan and kirtan but it is meant for starting construction of Ram Mandir.” At para 9, the order said:

"On December 5, 1992 a secret meeting was held at the residence of  Vinay Katyar, which was attended by Advani and Pawan Kumar Pandey and a final decision to demolish disputed structure was taken. Their argument was that there was a ban on construction not on demolition. Thus the accused leaders assembled near Ram Janam Bhoomi/ Babri Masjid on December 6, 1992, and Advani categorically said in his public speech, before the demolition of disputed structure that ‘today is the last day of kar sewa, kar sewaks would perform last kar sewa’. When he came to know that central forces were proceeding from Faizabad to Ayodhya, he asked the public to block the National  Highway, so that the forces do not reach Ram Janam Bhoomi.  Prosecution has also contended that when disputed structure was being pulled down,. Advani asked Kalyan Singh not to tender his resignation till the disputed structure is completely pulled down."
READ MORE

Inside story behind Modi govt's move to regulate cattle slaughter markets

While there has been outrage over the new rules framed by the government banning the sale of cattle slaughter, the exercise to frame these rules started out to put an end to something happening in neighbouring Nepal. The government is on record saying that the new Cruelty to Animals (Regulation of Livestock Markets) Rules 2017 was conceived on the directions of the Supreme Court (SC). The SC, in turn, had set the ball rolling after a petition filed by Gauri Maulekhi, animal rights activist. Maulekhia told Business Standard, “The government has done the right thing by introducing these rules. Yet a lot of misinformed people are criticising this move. They should look at the despicable conditions in which animals meant for slaughter are treated at animal markets. I am completely happy with the new rules. If we have to be secure as a nation, we have to protect our livestock from the cattle mafia.”

Maulekhi’s petition seemed to have achieved what she hadn’t set out to achieve in the first place. “That is the beauty of a Public Interest Litigation. It doesn’t need to be confined to specifics. Although I wanted to put an end to ritual sacrifice of cattle in Nepal, the highest court directed that rules be framed for an end to barbaric treatment of animals at various markets where the organised mafia operates” said Maulekhi.

The petition sought the court’s intervention after pointing out that cattle was being illegally transported from Indian states of Bihar, Uttar Pradesh, Uttarakhand and West Bengal “across the India-Nepal border for a gruesome and barbaric ritual sacrifice at the Gadhimai festival held every five years in the village of Bariyapur, across the India-Nepal border. In a space of two days over 5 lakh animals are slaughtered making it the largest animal sacrifice in the world.”
READ MORE

100 GB broadband data for Rs 500: Reliance Jio may launch JioFiber by Oct

Reliance Jio Infocomm, which has been testing its fibre-to-the-home (FTTH)-based JioFiber broadband in select cities, is expected to commercially launch its services by October, according to a report in the Economic Times.

Under its base plan, Reliance JioFiber might offer a whopping 100 GB of broadband data for as low as Rs 500. In terms of bandwidth, the JioFibre services are speculated to offer 100 Mbps speed.

Recently, Business Standard reported that the Reliance JioFiber broadband services would launch with a preview offer – similar to how the company launched its Jio services -- with free access to JioFiber services for 90 days. Under the complimentary offer, the JioFibre broadband services will offer a blazing speed of 100 Mbps and a monthly free data of 100 GB, besides free access to Jio premium applications. The user will continue to get 1 Mbps of speed after 100 GB data cap.

Though the services would be offered for free, Reliance Jio would charge Rs 4,500 as a one-time refundable installation charge that will be returned if JioFibre users choose not to continue with JioFiber.

To counter JioFibre, India’s leading broadband service provider Bharti Airtel recently upgraded its plans and is now offering almost 100 per cent of additional free data on every plan. Under the new plans, the company is offering 60 GB of high-speed broadband data at Rs 899, up from 30 GB offered earlier. Similarly, the updated Rs 1,099 plan dishes out 90 GB, compared with 50 GB earlier. The higher Rs 1,299 plan offers 125 GB, compared with 75 GB, while the premium Rs 1,499 plan offers 160 GB, against 100 GB earlier.

For Airtel broadband customers in the Delhi-NCR region, the company is running a promotion and offering additional 1,000 GB of broadband data on select plans.
READ MORE

Modi govt's cattle trade ban to halt $4 bn beef exports, lead to job losses

CATTLE TRADE BAN - The Indian government's ban on the trade of cattle for slaughter threatens $4 billion in annual beef exports and millions of jobs if the government does not revoke the stoppage decreed last week, according to two industry officials.

In the latest setback to the Muslim-dominated meat industry, Prime Minister Narendra Modi's government decreed animal markets will only be able to trade cattle for agricultural purposes such as ploughing and dairy production.

The ban is likely to further alienate Muslims, who make up 14 percent of India's 1.3 billion people, and raise communal and religious tensions. Hindu hardliners and cow vigilante groups have been increasingly asserting themselves since Modi's Hindu nationalist government came to power in 2014.

Most of India's beef comes from water buffalo rather than cows, which are considered holy by Hindus, but local cattle traders and slaughterhouses have repeatedly come under attacks from activist groups that oppose the meat trade.

"In the garb of the order that prohibits the trading of cattle at organised markets, the government has tried to impose a ban on the meat industry," Abdul Faheem Qureshi, head of the Muslim All India Jamiatul Quresh Action Committee, told Reuters.

"Meat supplies will very soon grind to a halt in India and abroad if either the government does not repeal this draconian order or a court does not step in," Qureshi said.

READ MORE