AI Avatar Background

AI Avatar Background — independent reviews, comparisons, pricing and step-by-step guides on Aizhi.

  • Nona-binning

    Nona-binning

    Nona-binning is a pixel binning technique used in high-resolution image sensors, primarily in smartphone cameras. The method is based on merging groups of nine neighbouring pixels arranged in a 3×3 pattern. This configuration allows a sensor with very small individual pixels to increase its effective light sensitivity when operating in low-light conditions, while still maintaining high nominal resolution in bright environments. == Overview == Nona-binning is most commonly implemented in sensors with a resolution of 108 megapixels and higher. As pixel counts grew, the physical dimensions of individual pixels continued to shrink, reducing the amount of light captured by each. The 3×3 binning structure enables a sensor to operate in two modes. In well-lit scenes, each pixel is processed separately, providing the full resolution of the sensor. In darker settings, nine pixels with identical colour filters are combined into a single output unit, increasing signal strength and reducing noise. == Technical principles == Unlike the traditional Bayer colour filter array, which alternates colours on a per-pixel basis, nona-binning uses a grouped layout. The sensor forms blocks of nine pixels with matching colour filters — typically within a Quad Bayer–derived arrangement extended to 3×3 regions. When operating in the binning mode, the sensor aggregates the charge generated by all nine pixels in each block. This increases effective sensitivity but lowers the final image resolution. When lighting conditions allow, the sensor returns to processing pixel data individually. == Applications == Nona-binning is primarily used in: Smartphone photography, particularly in devices equipped with sensors exceeding 100 megapixels. Low-light imaging, where increased sensitivity improves exposure stability and reduces noise. Computational photography systems, such as multi-frame processing and HDR capture. == Related technologies == Nona-binning belongs to the broader group of pixel-binning approaches used in modern sensors. Other implementations include Tetracell, which merges four pixels in a 2×2 block, and hexa-binning, which combines six pixels, though it is less common. All of these methods aim to balance the high nominal resolution of mobile sensors with the need for improved low-light performance.

    Read more →
  • Perfectly Imperfect (platform)

    Perfectly Imperfect (platform)

    Perfectly Imperfect is an online newsletter and social media platform. It was initially founded in 2020 as a biweekly email newsletter that focused on recommendations. In January 2024, Perfectly Imperfect launched PI.FYI, a social media platform. The platform is based around sharing recommendations. Its main feed is presented in reverse chronological order and is not algorithmically curated. == History == Perfectly Imperfect was started during the COVID-19 pandemic by Tyler Bainbridge, alongside college friends Alex Cushing and Serey Morm, whom he met at UMass Lowell; Morm later departed. Motivated by a dissatisfaction with algorithm-driven recommendation culture, they launched on Substack in September 2020. Its early newsletter format, PI, published brief recommendation lists and personal notes from contributors. Contributors have included a mix of underground artists and more established creative figures, such as Charli XCX, Chloe Cherry, Chloe Wise, and Meetka Otto. In October 2024, PI announced it was leaving Substack to launch its own site. == Overview == The current platform, PI.FYI, features both editorial content (guest columns, long-form essays, staff picks) and user-generated recommendations. The platform also supports "Ask" posts, where users can solicit recommendations from the community, and allows commenting, liking, and profile customization. In August 2025, it launched an events feature. In 2022, Perfectly Imperfect hosted their first offline event at Baby's All Right in Brooklyn, with a performance by The Dare. They have since expanded their event promotion/sponsorship to markets such as Los Angeles, San Francisco, and even Auckland.

    Read more →
  • Cipher

    Cipher

    In cryptography, a cipher (or cypher) is an algorithm for performing encryption or decryption—a series of well-defined steps that can be followed as a procedure. An alternative, less common term is encipherment. To encipher or encode is to convert information into cipher or code. In common parlance, "cipher" is synonymous with "code", as they are both a set of steps that encrypt a message; however, the concepts are distinct in cryptography, especially classical cryptography. Codes generally substitute different length strings of characters in the output, while ciphers generally substitute the same number of characters as are input. A code maps one meaning with another. Words and phrases can be coded as letters or numbers. Codes typically have direct meaning from input to key. Codes primarily function to save time. Ciphers are algorithmic. The given input must follow the cipher's process to be solved. Ciphers are commonly used to encrypt written information. Codes operated by substituting according to a large codebook which linked a random string of characters or numbers to a word or phrase. For example, "UQJHSE" could be the code for "Proceed to the following coordinates.". When using a cipher the original information is known as plaintext, and the encrypted form as ciphertext. The ciphertext message contains all the information of the plaintext message, but is not in a format readable by a human or computer without the proper mechanism to decrypt it. The operation of a cipher usually depends on a piece of auxiliary information, called a key (or, in traditional NSA parlance, a cryptovariable). The encrypting procedure is varied depending on the key, which changes the detailed operation of the algorithm. A key must be selected before using a cipher to encrypt a message, with some exceptions such as ROT13 and Atbash. Most modern ciphers can be categorized in several ways: By whether they work on blocks of symbols usually of a fixed size (block ciphers), or on a continuous stream of symbols (stream ciphers). By whether the same key is used for both encryption and decryption (symmetric key algorithms), or if a different key is used for each (asymmetric key algorithms). If the algorithm is symmetric, the key must be known to the recipient and sender and to no one else. If the algorithm is an asymmetric one, the enciphering key is different from, but closely related to, the deciphering key. If one key cannot be deduced from the other, the asymmetric key algorithm has the public/private key property and one of the keys may be made public without loss of confidentiality. == Etymology == Originating from the Sanskrit word for zero शून्य (śuṇya), via the Arabic word صفر (ṣifr), the word "cipher" spread to Europe as part of the Arabic numeral system during the Middle Ages. The Roman numeral system lacked the concept of zero, and this limited advances in mathematics. In this transition, the word was adopted into Medieval Latin as cifra, and then into Middle French as cifre. This eventually led to the English word cipher (also spelt cypher). One theory for how the term came to refer to encoding is that the concept of zero was confusing to Europeans, and so the term came to refer to a message or communication that was not easily understood. The term cipher was later also used to refer to any Arabic digit, or to calculation using them, so encoding text in the form of Arabic numerals is literally converting the text to "ciphers". == Versus codes == In casual contexts, "code" and "cipher" can typically be used interchangeably; however, the technical usages of the words refer to different concepts. Codes contain meaning; words and phrases are assigned to numbers or symbols, creating a shorter message. An example of this is the commercial telegraph code which was used to shorten long telegraph messages which resulted from entering into commercial contracts using exchanges of telegrams. Another example is given by whole word ciphers, which allow the user to replace an entire word with a symbol or character, much like the way written Japanese utilizes Kanji (meaning Chinese characters in Japanese) characters to supplement the native Japanese characters representing syllables. An example using English language with Kanji could be to replace "The quick brown fox jumps over the lazy dog" by "The quick brown 狐 jumps 上 the lazy 犬". Stenographers sometimes use specific symbols to abbreviate whole words. Ciphers, on the other hand, work at a lower level: the level of individual letters, small groups of letters, or, in modern schemes, individual bits and blocks of bits. Some systems used both codes and ciphers in one system, using superencipherment to increase the security. In some cases the terms codes and ciphers are used synonymously with substitution and transposition, respectively. Historically, cryptography was split into a dichotomy of codes and ciphers, while coding had its own terminology analogous to that of ciphers: "encoding, codetext, decoding" and so on. However, codes have a variety of drawbacks, including susceptibility to cryptanalysis and the difficulty of managing a cumbersome codebook. Because of this, codes have fallen into disuse in modern cryptography, and ciphers are the dominant technique. == Types == There are a variety of different types of encryption. Algorithms used earlier in the history of cryptography are substantially different from modern methods, and modern ciphers can be classified according to how they operate and whether they use one or two keys. === Historical === The Caesar Cipher is one of the earliest known cryptographic systems. Julius Caesar used a cipher that shifts the letters in the alphabet in place by three and wrapping the remaining letters to the front to write to Marcus Tullius Cicero in approximately 50 BC. Historical pen and paper ciphers used in the past are sometimes known as classical ciphers. They include simple substitution ciphers (such as ROT13) and transposition ciphers (such as a Rail Fence Cipher). For example, "GOOD DOG" can be encrypted as "PLLX XLP" where "L" substitutes for "O", "P" for "G", and "X" for "D" in the message. Transposition of the letters "GOOD DOG" can result in "DGOGDOO". These simple ciphers and examples are easy to crack, even without plaintext-ciphertext pairs. In the 1640s, the Parliamentarian commander, Edward Montagu, 2nd Earl of Manchester, developed ciphers to send coded messages to his allies during the English Civil War. The English theologian John Wilkins published a book in 1641 titled "Mercury, or The Secret and Swift Messenger" and described a musical cipher wherein letters of the alphabet were substituted for music notes. This species of melodic cipher was depicted in greater detail by author Abraham Rees in his book Cyclopædia (1778). Simple ciphers were replaced by polyalphabetic substitution ciphers (such as the Vigenère) which changed the substitution alphabet for every letter. For example, "GOOD DOG" can be encrypted as "PLSX TWF" where "L", "S", and "W" substitute for "O". With even a small amount of known or estimated plaintext, simple polyalphabetic substitution ciphers and letter transposition ciphers designed for pen and paper encryption are easy to crack. It is possible to create a secure pen and paper cipher based on a one-time pad, but these have other disadvantages. During the early twentieth century, electro-mechanical machines were invented to do encryption and decryption using transposition, polyalphabetic substitution, and a kind of "additive" substitution. In rotor machines, several rotor disks provided polyalphabetic substitution, while plug boards provided another substitution. Keys were easily changed by changing the rotor disks and the plugboard wires. Although these encryption methods were more complex than previous schemes and required machines to encrypt and decrypt, other machines such as the British Bombe were invented to crack these encryption methods. === Modern === Modern encryption methods can be divided by two criteria: by type of key used, and by type of input data. By type of key used ciphers are divided into: symmetric key algorithms (Private-key cryptography), where one same key is used for encryption and decryption, and asymmetric key algorithms (Public-key cryptography), where two different keys are used for encryption and decryption. In a symmetric key algorithm (e.g., DES and AES), the sender and receiver must have a shared key set up in advance and kept secret from all other parties; the sender uses this key for encryption, and the receiver uses the same key for decryption. The design of AES (Advanced Encryption System) was beneficial because it aimed to overcome the flaws in the design of the DES (Data encryption standard). AES's designer's claim that the common means of modern cipher cryptanalytic attacks are ineffective against AES due to its design structure. Ciphers can be distinguished into two types by the type o

    Read more →
  • Social media background check

    Social media background check

    A social media background check is an investigative technique that involves scrutinizing the social media profiles and activities of individuals, primarily for pre-employment screening and other official verifications. These checks are performed to review people's online behavioral history on social media websites such as Facebook, Twitter, and LinkedIn. Social media background checks have become a common part of recruitment processes, among other verification procedures. == History == In the early 21st century, with the rapid expansion of social media platforms such as Facebook, Twitter, and LinkedIn, employers began to use these channels to gather additional information about prospective employees. Initially, social media background checks were an informal aspect of recruitment, but they have gradually gained formal recognition as a crucial element in candidate screening. Proponents of social media background checks argue that such reviews provide insight into a candidate's professional interests and networks, though the reliability of such assessments remains contested among researchers. == Rise in society == The practice of social media background checks has seen a significant surge in the last decade. This rise can be attributed to the exponential increase in social media users and the growing awareness among organizations regarding the importance of hiring individuals who align with their values and culture. Various platforms provide services explicitly designed to conduct social media background checks efficiently, simplifying the process for businesses. Companies providing social media background check services, such as Ferretly and Certn, have received venture capital funding, reflecting investor interest in the sector. The incorporation of artificial intelligence into conducting AI-powered social media background checks also illustrates its continued popularity and that businesses are looking to ramp up and even automate their use. High-profile cases in which individuals faced employment or admission consequences for past social media posts have raised awareness of social media background checking practices. For example, director James Gunn faced termination from Marvel Studios in 2018 over past offensive tweets, though he was later rehired. Additionally, multiple college admissions officers have acknowledged reviewing applicants' social media profiles, though such practices vary by institution. == Evolution of ethical considerations == Social media background checks are not without controversy, raising significant ethical considerations that have evolved in recent years. Privacy advocates argue that social media background checks raise concerns about data use and discrimination, particularly given the use of personal information that may not reflect job-relevant behavior. Legal scholars debate whether reviewing publicly posted information constitutes a privacy violation under U.S. law. Researchers and critics note that social media profiles often present curated representations of users' lives and may not reflect workplace behavior or professional competence. Moreover, the accuracy of social media background checks has been called into question, with critics pointing out that these checks may not always yield reliable or comprehensive results. Critics also warn about potential misuse of information obtained from social media, including cyberbullying and harassment. A 2023 study by found that approximately 90% of employers incorporate social media into hiring processes, with over half of those surveyed reporting they had rejected candidates based on social media content. This informal approach operates largely outside federal compliance frameworks. Critics argue that without regulation, candidates lack dispute mechanisms available under regulatory frameworks like the Fair Credit Reporting Act (FCRA), which requires compliance when background checks formally influence employment decisions. In a hiring environment where the practice is already performed often on an individual basis, the introduction of systematic, regulated screening practices that meet federal compliance standards can present a better, fairer alternative for both employers and candidates. == Business considerations == From a business perspective, social media background checks can be a valuable tool in protecting an organization's reputation and maintaining a safe and respectful workplace environment. A well-conducted social media background check can identify potential red flags, helping to prevent instances of workplace harassment or other negative behaviors. However, businesses also face potential legal repercussions if social media background checks are conducted improperly, such as non-compliance with the Fair Credit Reporting Act (FCRA) in the United States. Critics argue that over-reliance on social media data may exclude qualified candidates whose professional competence is not reflected in their online presence. The proliferation of social media screening services has prompted legal and industry experts to emphasize the importance of compliance with the Fair Credit Reporting Act and relevant state privacy laws when conducting such checks.

    Read more →
  • Parkerian Hexad

    Parkerian Hexad

    The Parkerian Hexad is a set of six elements of information security proposed by Donn B. Parker in 1998. The Parkerian Hexad adds three additional attributes to the three classic security attributes of the CIA triad (confidentiality, integrity, availability). The Parkerian Hexad attributes are the following: Confidentiality Possession or Control Integrity Authenticity Availability Utility These attributes of information are atomic in that they are not broken down into further constituents; they are non-overlapping in that they refer to unique aspects of information. Any information security breach can be described as affecting one or more of these fundamental attributes of information. == Attributes from the CIA triad == === Confidentiality === Confidentiality refers to the "quality or state of being private or secret; known only to a limited few", or "the property that information is not made available or disclosed to unauthorized individuals, entities, or processes". For example: If an enterprise's strategic plans are leaked to competitors then this is a breach of confidentiality; If unauthorized persons gain access to an individual's financial records then that individual's confidentiality is breached. === Integrity === Integrity refers to being correct or consistent with the intended state of information. Any unauthorized modification of data, whether deliberate or accidental, is a breach of data integrity. For example: Data stored on disk are expected to be stable. If the data is changed at random by problems with a disk controller then this is a breach of integrity; Data generated by a medical device is transmitted and stored in the healthcare center but neither altered nor tampered with; Application programs are supposed to record information correctly. If the application introduces deviations from the intended values then this is a breach of integrity. "From Donn Parker: My definition of information integrity comes from the dictionaries. Integrity means that the information is whole, sound, and unimpaired (not necessarily correct). It means nothing is missing from the information it is complete and in intended good order". === Availability === Availability means having timely access to information. For example: A disk crash or denial-of-service attacks both cause a breach of availability. Any delay in response of a system that exceeds the expected service levels for that system can be described as a breach of availability. GPS jamming can lead to loss of Availability of the GPS system. == Parker's added attributes == === Authenticity === Authenticity is the "quality of being authentic or of established authority for truth and correctness". Parker defines it thus: "is the information genuine and accurate? Does it conform to reality and have validity?" and "authoritative, valid, true, real, genuine, or worthy of acceptance or belief by reason of conformity to fact and reality". === Possession or control === Possession or control refers to the loss of data by the authorized user (even if the ʺthiefʺ cannot access the data). From a control systems perspective, it is any loss of control (the ability to change settings and functions) or loss of view (the ability to monitor the system’s operation and its response to controls). Suppose a thief were to steal a sealed envelope containing a bank debit card and its personal identification number. Even if the thief did not open that envelope, it's reasonable for the victim to be concerned that the thief could do so at any time. That situation illustrates a loss of control or possession of information but does not involve the breach of confidentiality. === Utility === Utility refers to the data's usefulness. For example: Suppose someone encrypted data on disk to prevent unauthorized access or undetected modifications–and then lost the decryption key: that would be a breach of utility. The data would be confidential, controlled, integral, authentic, and available–they just wouldn't be useful in that form. The conversion of salary data from one currency into an inappropriate currency would be a breach of utility, as would the storage of data in a format inappropriate for a specific computer architecture; e.g., EBCDIC instead of ASCII or 9-track magnetic tape instead of DVD-ROM. A tabular representation of data substituted for a graph could be described as a breach of utility if the substitution made it more difficult to interpret the data. Utility is often confused with availability because breaches such as those described in these examples may also require time to work around the change in data format or presentation. However, the concept of usefulness is distinct from that of availability.

    Read more →
  • List of broadband over power line deployments

    List of broadband over power line deployments

    This is a list of broadband over power line deployments. In this sense, "broadband" usually refers to Internet access using power line communication technology. == BPL pilot projects - 1st Gen (UPA) == === Inactive pilot projects === North America: United States: The United Telecom Council publishes the Federal Communications Commission (FCC)-mandated BPL Interference Resolution website, which provides a list of all BPL deployments in the US. Canada: Quebec: As of 2005, PLC communication technology developed by Ariane Controls is being installed inside and outside existing buildings to control lights and other energy-hungry devices. The cheap devices allow energy consumption to be better managed, and so save much energy and bring a clear return on investment. Western Europe: Sweden: Vattenfall is using PLC technology at 1200 baud for automatic meter reading based on an Iskraemeco product. Central and Eastern Europe, and Eurasia: Russian Federation: Electro-com has deployed widely BPL/PLC technology and offers internet access service in Moscow, Nizhny Novgorod, Ryazan, Kaluga and Rostov-on-Don, planning to extend coverage to main Russian cities. Currently the company does not provide other services, though plans to start providing telephone, and television services someday. Base equipment is a DefiDev modem with a DS2 chipset. The company had 35,000 subscribers and an annual growth of 15-20%. The company has, however, halted operations in Moscow in September, 2008, having sold its client network to an IDSL internet provider. Romania: In January, 2006, the Ministry of Communications and Information Technology introduced a PLC trial in the rural locality of Band, Mureș County, offering phone and broadband internet access for €7 per month. The technology was introduced to 50 households. Montenegro: In March, 2002, the Internet Crna Gora biggest internet provider in Montenegro launched a pilot project in town of Cetinje. Serbia: In August 2002, the Star Engineering from Niš launched a pilot project to show a completely new way to access the Internet, which is a new in that time in most countries around the world. Hungary: The first powerline service in Hungary was realized in September, 2003, in the Riverside apartment house in Budapest by 23Vnet Ltd. The PLC equipment was supplied by ASCOM Powerline. After four months the service was counting 100 users from 450 apartment owners. The bandwidth is 4.5 Mbit/s. Asia, Pacific, and Oceania: Indonesia: PT Kejora Gemilang Internusa "KEJORA", under their banner PLANET BROADBAND, is currently rolling out broadband over power line, with over 300,000 homes expected to be enabled by August 2010. PT. Kejora Gemilang Internusa signed an 8-year Joint Venture concession agreement with ICON+ a division of PT. Perusahaan Listrik Negara (Indonesia electricity company). Under the terms of the agreement PLAnet Broadband are to supply BPL/PLC to Jakarta West and West Java. Another company, PT. Broadband Powerline Indonesia, has been developing broadband over power line in apartment buildings since 2006. PT. BPI also produces data couplers to make broadband over powerline possible in three phases (R, S, T) with a single master. India : In India IIIT Allahabad has completed a project in co-operation with Corinex Communications Canada to implement a prototype of BPL for University campus and nearby villages. Africa and the Middle East: Egypt: The Engineering Office for Integrated Projects (EOIP) has deployed PLC technology widely in Alexandria, Fayed, and Tanta. Based on a locally developed system, the company provides AMR for electricity utilities. Currently, the company has about 70,000 subscribers. South Africa: Goal Technology Solutions (GTS) trialled the technology and is offering service in the suburbs of Pretoria, and plans to extend it to other areas. The tests were done with Mitsubishi equipment using a DS2 chipset, and the company claims a maximum throughput of 90 Mbit/s although initially only "512 Kbits/s ADSL equivalent speeds" are available. Now it uses DefiDev's equipment, and according to GTS's website, it will expand available bandwidth up to 5-20 Mbit/s. Ghana: Cactel Communications, Ltd. successfully deployed an MV solution pilot project in the Graphic Communications Group in Accra in June, 2005. A Cactel Remote Energy Management System (REMS) pilot project for the Electricity Company of Ghana (ECG) is running a 40-user pilot project at the University of Ghana in Legon. The current project combines fiber, radio link, Wi-Fi and PLC to provide broadband internet access and telephony. It showcases the interoperability of PLC technology and the company's expertise in emerging market design and deployment. Cactel hopes to deploy nationally, and is in deliberations with the national stakeholders and with Ghana's Ministry of Communications (MoC). AllTerra Communications successfully implemented a pilot test of broadband over power lines in Akosombo. In partnership with VRA, this test involves demonstrating transmission of broadband from medium to low voltage signals. AllTerra is working with VRA to expand the pilot project to include essential grid management utilities that will help balance and manage the current electricity transmission throughout their various substations. Using IT as a catalyst for economic development, AllTerra is expanding into numerous areas throughout Ghana. Vobiss Solutions Ltd successfully implemented a Hybrid Fibre BPL pilot network within EMEFS Hillview Estate in collaboration with ECG. Saudi Arabia: ElectroNet has been working with the Saudi Electric Company since 2005 on a pilot project using broadband over power lines over medium voltage cables and linking into low voltage distribution within a shopping mall. The pilot project also integrates automatic meter readers. Powerlines Communications Co. Ltd. implemented an AMR pilot project for Saudi Electricity Company in 2006. The project was located in the city of Jeddah on the west coast of Saudi Arabia. Digital KWh meters were installed in parallel with analog KWh meters. Readings taken by the Saudi Electricity Company showed variations of less than 1%. A BPL pilot project was included. Saudi Arabian Computer Management Consultants (SACMAC) has signed a deal to become an official system integrator and distributor for Mitsubishi PLC. It is expected to become a great success, because the existing broadband service, monopolized by the Saudi Telecom Company, is expensive and has poor customer service (some clients report that company techs arrive months after ordering). SACMAC has declined to talk about specifics of availability and price but says it will start rolling out the service in a few months (as of May 2006) and its price will be lower than current broadband providers. === Concluded pilot projects === The following pilot projects have ended: Australia, Tasmania: In November 2007, electricity retailer Aurora Energy ended its involvement with BPL and announced it was switching to Optical Fiber. This ended their commercial trial begun in September 2005, offering BPL services to 500 homes in the suburb of Tolmans Hill near Hobart, which had followed a successful technological trial earlier that year. Portugal ended BPL/PLC deployments in the country in October 2006, reportedly for economic reasons., Russian Federation: In September 2008, Russia's only BPL provider Electro-com ended deployments in Moscow for economic reasons. Spain: In May 2007 Iberdrola and Endesa (the main power companies in Spain) ended their projects to deploy PLC. United States: As of July 2010, the City of Manassas, VA has shut down their BPL deployment, which was the largest in the country. As of April 2007, Motorola has shuttered its Powerline LV Access BPL and reportedly plans to re-purpose the technology to a new system called Powerline MU, which is for use within multiple-unit dwellings. Motorola's system uses only residential-side low-voltage power lines for transmission to reduce the antenna effect, and successfully demonstrated frequency-notching for reduced potential for interference over the Amperion Inc. and Current Technologies LLC systems. Motorola invited the American Radio Relay League to participate with these tests, and even installed the Motorola system at their headquarters. Preliminary results were very positive with regard to interference, because the Motorola system does not use BPL on the powerlines leading up to the neighborhood. The BPL carrier is only used for the last leg of the trip from the pole to the house, and gets the signal to the pole via radio. This limits the interference to the area surrounding the last leg to the house. === Dismantled pilot projects === The following other BPL trials in the US are dismantled as of May 2008:

    Read more →
  • Social Media Working Group Act of 2014

    Social Media Working Group Act of 2014

    The Social Media Working Group Act of 2014 (H.R. 4263) is a bill that would direct the United States Secretary of Homeland Security to establish within the United States Department of Homeland Security (DHS) a social media working group (the Group) to provide guidance and best practices to the emergency preparedness and response community on the use of social media technologies before, during, and after a terrorist attack. The bill was introduced into the United States House of Representatives during the 113th United States Congress. == Background == === Social media === Social media is the social interaction among people in which they create, share or exchange information and ideas in virtual communities and networks. Andreas Kaplan and Michael Haenlein define social media as "a group of Internet-based applications that build on the ideological and technological foundations of Web 2.0, and that allow the creation and exchange of user-generated content." Furthermore, social media depend on mobile and web-based technologies to create highly interactive platforms through which individuals and communities share, co-create, discuss, and modify user-generated content. They introduce substantial and pervasive changes to communication between organizations, communities, and individuals. Social media differ from traditional or industrial media in many ways, including quality, reach, frequency, usability, immediacy, and permanence. === Virtual Social Media Working Group === First responders have increasingly used social media in emergency response and recovery operations. Social media tools are used to connect with citizens after a disaster and share information. The Virtual Social Media Working group (VSMWG) is an online platform that gives advice to first responders on how to safely and effectively use social media in emergency response operations. The working group is made up of subject matter experts from across the U.S. It was created by DHS in December 2010 and gives first responders guidance and best practices regarding the use of social media during emergencies. The DHS S&T and the VSMWG work with local and state governments, academics and nonprofits. Meetings of the VSMWG are chaired by the Under Secretary of Homeland Security for Science and Technology. == Provisions of the bill == This summary is based largely on the summary provided by the Congressional Research Service, a public domain source. The Social Media Working Group Act of 2014 would amend the Homeland Security Act of 2002 to direct the United States Secretary of Homeland Security to establish within the United States Department of Homeland Security (DHS) a social media working group (the Group) to provide guidance and best practices to the emergency preparedness and response community on the use of social media technologies before, during, and after a terrorist attack. The bill would require the Group to submit an annual report that includes: (1) a review of current and emerging social media technologies being used to support preparedness and response activities related to terrorist attacks, of best practices and lessons learned on the use of social media during the response to terrorist attacks that occurred during the period covered by the report, and of available training for government officials on the use of social media in response to a terrorist attack; (2) recommendations to improve DHS's use of social media and to improve information sharing among DHS and its components and among state and local governments; and (3) a summary of coordination efforts with the private sector to discuss and resolve legal, operational, technical, privacy, and security concerns. == Congressional Budget Office report == This summary is based largely on the summary provided by the Congressional Budget Office, as ordered reported by the House Committee on Homeland Security on June 11, 2014. This is a public domain source. H.R. 4263 would direct the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) to establish a working group to provide guidance and best practices on the use of social media technologies, specifically during a terrorist attack or other emergency. The group would prepare guidance for the emergency preparedness and response community. The bill would define the membership of the working group, which would include more than 20 experts from federal, state, local, and tribal governments along with nongovernmental organizations. The working group would be exempt from the Federal Advisory Committee Act and would be authorized to hold virtual meetings to fulfill the requirement to meet twice a year. The working group would be required to submit an annual report on emerging trends and best practices for emergency response through social media. Based on the cost of similar activities carried out under the DHS Acquisition and Accountability Efficiency Act and the Critical Infrastructure Research and Development Advancement Act of 2013, the Congressional Budget Office (CBO) estimates that the new DHS responsibilities and the annual report required by H.R. 4263 would cost a total of less than $500,000 annually, assuming the availability of appropriated funds. Enacting the legislation would not affect direct spending or revenues; therefore, pay-as-you-go procedures do not apply. H.R. 4263 contains no intergovernmental or private-sector mandates as defined in the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act and would impose no costs on state, local, or tribal governments. == Procedural history == The Social Media Working Group Act of 2014 was introduced into the United States House of Representatives on March 14, 2014, by Rep. Susan W. Brooks (R, IN-5). It was referred to the United States House Committee on Homeland Security and the United States House Homeland Security Subcommittee on Emergency Preparedness, Response, and Communications. On June 19, 2014, it was reported (amended) alongside House Report 113-480. On July 8, 2014, the House voted in Roll Call Vote 369 to pass the bill 375–19. == Debate and discussion == Nate Elliott, a social media expert at Forrester Research, explains that "the hope is when government or another authority tweets something, people will share it for them," but that this often doesn't happen. This problem, that "messages wash away very quickly," is the reason that the federal government is trying to formulate a better social media strategy. Rep. Steven Palazzo (R-MS), who co-sponsored the bill, stated that "social media has played a crucial role in emergency preparedness and response in Mississippi, including during disasters like Hurricane Isaac and the tornadoes that hit the Hattiesburg area a little over a year ago." He said that their goal with the bill was to "build upon existing public-private partnerships and use social media in a more strategic way in order to help save lives and property."

    Read more →
  • Key-agreement protocol

    Key-agreement protocol

    In cryptography, a key-agreement protocol is a protocol whereby two (or more) parties generate a cryptographic key as a function of information provided by each honest party so that no party can predetermine the resulting value. In particular, all honest participants influence the outcome. A key-agreement protocol is a specialisation of a key-exchange protocol. At the completion of the protocol, all parties share the same key. A key-agreement protocol precludes undesired third parties from forcing a key choice on the agreeing parties. A secure key agreement can ensure confidentiality and data integrity in communications systems, ranging from simple messaging applications to complex banking transactions. Secure agreement is defined relative to a security model, for example the Universal Model. More generally, when evaluating protocols, it is important to state security goals and the security model. For example, it may be required for the session key to be authenticated. A protocol can be evaluated for success only in the context of its goals and attack model. An example of an adversarial model is the Dolev–Yao model. In many key exchange systems, one party generates the key, and sends that key to the other party; the other party has no influence on the key. == Exponential key exchange == The first publicly known public-key agreement protocol that meets the above criteria was the Diffie–Hellman key exchange, in which two parties jointly exponentiate a generator with random numbers, in such a way that an eavesdropper cannot feasibly determine what the resultant shared key is. Exponential key agreement in and of itself does not specify any prior agreement or subsequent authentication between the participants. It has thus been described as an anonymous key agreement protocol. == Symmetric key agreement == Symmetric key agreement (SKA) is a method of key agreement that uses solely symmetric cryptography and cryptographic hash functions as cryptographic primitives. It is related to symmetric authenticated key exchange. SKA may assume the use of initial shared secrets or a trusted third party with whom the agreeing parties share a secret is assumed. If no third party is present, then achieving SKA can be trivial: we tautologically assume that two parties that share an initial secret and have achieved SKA. SKA contrasts with key-agreement protocols that include techniques from asymmetric cryptography, such as key encapsulation mechanisms. The initial exchange of a shared key must be done in a manner that is private and integrity-assured. Historically, this was achieved by physical means, such as by using a trusted courier. An example of a SKA protocol is the Needham–Schroeder protocol. It establishes a session key between two parties on the same network, using a server as a trusted third party. The original Needham–Schroeder protocol is vulnerable to a replay attack. Timestamps and nonces are included to fix this attack. It forms the basis for the Kerberos protocol. === Types of key agreement === Boyd et al. classify two-party key agreement protocols according to two criteria as follows: whether a pre-shared key already exists or not the method of generating the session key. The pre-shared key may be shared between the two parties, or each party may share a key with a trusted third party. If there is no secure channel (as may be established via a pre-shared key), it is impossible to create an authenticated session key. The session key may be generated via: key transport, key agreement and hybrid. If there is no trusted third party, then the cases of key transport and hybrid session key generation are indistinguishable. SKA is concerned with protocols in which the session key is established using only symmetric primitives. == Authentication == Anonymous key exchange, like Diffie–Hellman, does not provide authentication of the parties, and is thus vulnerable to man-in-the-middle attacks. A wide variety of cryptographic authentication schemes and protocols have been developed to provide authenticated key agreement to prevent man-in-the-middle and related attacks. These methods generally mathematically bind the agreed key to other agreed-upon data, such as the following: public–private key pairs shared secret keys passwords === Public keys === A widely used mechanism for defeating such attacks is the use of digitally signed keys that must be integrity-assured: if Bob's key is signed by a trusted third party vouching for his identity, Alice can have considerable confidence that a signed key she receives is not an attempt to intercept by Eve. When Alice and Bob have a public-key infrastructure, they may digitally sign an agreed Diffie–Hellman key, or exchanged Diffie–Hellman public keys. Such signed keys, sometimes signed by a certificate authority, are one of the primary mechanisms used for secure web traffic (including HTTPS, SSL or TLS protocols). Other specific examples are MQV, YAK and the ISAKMP component of the IPsec protocol suite for securing Internet Protocol communications. However, these systems require care in endorsing the match between identity information and public keys by certificate authorities in order to work properly. === Hybrid systems === Hybrid systems use public-key cryptography to exchange secret keys, which are then used in a symmetric-key cryptography systems. Most practical applications of cryptography use a combination of cryptographic functions to implement an overall system that provides all of the four desirable features of secure communications (confidentiality, integrity, authentication, and non-repudiation). === Passwords === Password-authenticated key agreement protocols require the separate establishment of a password (which may be smaller than a key) in a manner that is both private and integrity-assured. These are designed to resist man-in-the-middle and other active attacks on the password and the established keys. For example, DH-EKE, SPEKE, and SRP are password-authenticated variations of Diffie–Hellman. === Other tricks === If one has an integrity-assured way to verify a shared key over a public channel, one may engage in a Diffie–Hellman key exchange to derive a short-term shared key, and then subsequently authenticate that the keys match. One way is to use a voice-authenticated read-out of the key, as in PGPfone. Voice authentication, however, presumes that it is infeasible for a man-in-the-middle to spoof one participant's voice to the other in real-time, which may be an undesirable assumption. Such protocols may be designed to work with even a small public value, such as a password. Variations on this theme have been proposed for Bluetooth pairing protocols. In an attempt to avoid using any additional out-of-band authentication factors, Davies and Price proposed the use of the interlock protocol of Ron Rivest and Adi Shamir, which has been subject to both attack and subsequent refinement.

    Read more →
  • Cloud-based quantum computing

    Cloud-based quantum computing

    Cloud-based quantum computing refers to the remote access of quantum computing resources—such as quantum emulators, simulators, or processors—via the internet. Cloud access enables users to develop, test, and execute quantum algorithms without the need for direct interaction with specialized hardware, facilitating broader participation in quantum software development and experimentation. In 2016, IBM launched the IBM Quantum Experience, one of the first publicly accessible quantum processors connected to the cloud. In early 2017, researchers at Rigetti Computing demonstrated programmable quantum cloud access through their software platform Forest, which included the pyQuil Python library. Since the early-2020s, cloud-based quantum computing has grown significantly, with multiple providers offering access to a variety of quantum hardware modalities, including superconducting qubits, trapped ions, neutral atoms, and photonic systems. Major platforms such as Amazon Braket, Azure Quantum, and qBraid aggregate quantum devices from hardware developers like IonQ, Rigetti Computing, QuEra, Pasqal, Oxford Quantum Circuits, and IBM Quantum. These platforms provide unified interfaces for users to write and execute quantum algorithms across diverse backends, often supporting open-source SDKs such as Qiskit, Cirq, and PennyLane. The proliferation of cloud-based access has played a key role in accelerating quantum education, algorithm research, and early-stage application development by lowering the barrier to experimentation with real quantum hardware. Cloud-based quantum computing has expanded access to quantum hardware and tools beyond traditional research laboratories. These platforms support educational initiatives, algorithm development, and early-stage commercial applications. == Applications == Cloud-based quantum computing is used across education, research, and software development, offering remote access to quantum systems without the need for on-site infrastructure. === Education === Quantum cloud platforms have become valuable tools in education, allowing students and instructors to engage with real quantum processors through user-friendly interfaces. Educators use these platforms to teach foundational concepts in quantum mechanics and quantum computing, as well as to demonstrate and implement quantum algorithms in a classroom or laboratory setting. === Scientific Research === Cloud-based access to quantum hardware has enabled researchers to conduct experiments in quantum information, test quantum algorithms, and compare quantum hardware platforms. Experiments such as testing Bell's theorem or evaluating quantum teleportation protocols have been performed on publicly available quantum processors. === Software Development and Prototyping === Developers use cloud-based platforms to prototype quantum software applications across fields such as optimization, machine learning, and chemistry. These platforms offer SDKs and APIs that integrate classical and quantum workflows, enabling experimentation with quantum algorithms in real-world or simulated environments. === Public Engagement and Games === Quantum cloud tools have also been used to create educational games and interactive applications aimed at increasing public understanding of quantum concepts. These efforts help bridge the gap between theoretical content and intuitive learning. == Existing platforms == qBraid Lab by qBraid is a cloud-based platform for quantum computing. It provides software tools for researchers and developers in quantum, as well as access to quantum hardware. qBraid provides cloud based access to Microsoft Azure Quantum and Amazon Braket devices including IQM, QuEra, Pasqal, Rigetti, IonQ, QIR simulators, Amazon Braket simulators, and the NEC Vector Annealer, as of August 2025. qBraid's base version is free, where unlimited hardware and simulator access is available with the purchase of credits. Quandela Cloud by Quandela is the platform to access first cloud-accessible European photonic quantum computer. The computer is interfaced using the Perceval scripting language, with tutorials and documentation available online for free. Xanadu Quantum Cloud by Xanadu is a platform with cloud-based access to three fully programmable photonic quantum computers. Forest by Rigetti Computing is a tool suite for cloud-based quantum computing. It includes a programming language, development tools and example algorithms. LIQUi> by Microsoft is a software architecture and tool suite for quantum computing. It includes a programming language, example optimization and scheduling algorithms, and quantum simulators. Q#, a quantum programming language by Microsoft on the .NET Framework seen as a successor to LIQUi|>. IBM Quantum Platform by IBM, providing access to quantum hardware as well as HPC simulators. These can be accessed programmatically using the Python-based Qiskit framework, or via graphical interface with the IBM Q Experience GUI. Both are based on the OpenQASM standard for representing quantum operations. There is also a tutorial and online community. Quantum in the Cloud by The University of Bristol, which consists of a quantum simulator and a four qubit optical quantum system. Quantum Playground by Google is an educational resource which features a simulator with a simple interface, and a scripting language and 3D quantum state visualization. Quantum in the Cloud is an experimental quantum cloud platform for access to a four-qubit nuclear magnetic resonance-NMRCloudQ computer, managed by Tsinghua University. Quantum Inspire by Qutech is the first platform in Europe providing cloud-based quantum computing to two hardware chips. Next to a 5-qubit transmon processor, Quantum Inspire is the first platform in the world to provide online access to a fully programmable 2-qubit electron spin quantum processor. Amazon Braket is a cloud-based quantum computing platform hosted by AWS which, as of June 2025, provides access to quantum computers built by IonQ, Rigetti, IQM, and QuEra. Braket also provides a quantum algorithm development environment and simulator. Forge by QC Ware is a cloud-based quantum computing platform that provides access to D-Wave hardware, as well as Google and IBM simulators. The platform offers a 30-day free trial, including one minute of quantum computing time. Quantum-as-a-Service by Scaleway is a cloud-based platform created in 2022 to access to real quantum hardware from IQM Quantum Computers, Alpine Quantum Technologies, Quandela and Pasqal. It also include access to GPU-powered emulators such as Aer, Qsim and Quandela proprietary emulation.

    Read more →
  • Key-agreement protocol

    Key-agreement protocol

    In cryptography, a key-agreement protocol is a protocol whereby two (or more) parties generate a cryptographic key as a function of information provided by each honest party so that no party can predetermine the resulting value. In particular, all honest participants influence the outcome. A key-agreement protocol is a specialisation of a key-exchange protocol. At the completion of the protocol, all parties share the same key. A key-agreement protocol precludes undesired third parties from forcing a key choice on the agreeing parties. A secure key agreement can ensure confidentiality and data integrity in communications systems, ranging from simple messaging applications to complex banking transactions. Secure agreement is defined relative to a security model, for example the Universal Model. More generally, when evaluating protocols, it is important to state security goals and the security model. For example, it may be required for the session key to be authenticated. A protocol can be evaluated for success only in the context of its goals and attack model. An example of an adversarial model is the Dolev–Yao model. In many key exchange systems, one party generates the key, and sends that key to the other party; the other party has no influence on the key. == Exponential key exchange == The first publicly known public-key agreement protocol that meets the above criteria was the Diffie–Hellman key exchange, in which two parties jointly exponentiate a generator with random numbers, in such a way that an eavesdropper cannot feasibly determine what the resultant shared key is. Exponential key agreement in and of itself does not specify any prior agreement or subsequent authentication between the participants. It has thus been described as an anonymous key agreement protocol. == Symmetric key agreement == Symmetric key agreement (SKA) is a method of key agreement that uses solely symmetric cryptography and cryptographic hash functions as cryptographic primitives. It is related to symmetric authenticated key exchange. SKA may assume the use of initial shared secrets or a trusted third party with whom the agreeing parties share a secret is assumed. If no third party is present, then achieving SKA can be trivial: we tautologically assume that two parties that share an initial secret and have achieved SKA. SKA contrasts with key-agreement protocols that include techniques from asymmetric cryptography, such as key encapsulation mechanisms. The initial exchange of a shared key must be done in a manner that is private and integrity-assured. Historically, this was achieved by physical means, such as by using a trusted courier. An example of a SKA protocol is the Needham–Schroeder protocol. It establishes a session key between two parties on the same network, using a server as a trusted third party. The original Needham–Schroeder protocol is vulnerable to a replay attack. Timestamps and nonces are included to fix this attack. It forms the basis for the Kerberos protocol. === Types of key agreement === Boyd et al. classify two-party key agreement protocols according to two criteria as follows: whether a pre-shared key already exists or not the method of generating the session key. The pre-shared key may be shared between the two parties, or each party may share a key with a trusted third party. If there is no secure channel (as may be established via a pre-shared key), it is impossible to create an authenticated session key. The session key may be generated via: key transport, key agreement and hybrid. If there is no trusted third party, then the cases of key transport and hybrid session key generation are indistinguishable. SKA is concerned with protocols in which the session key is established using only symmetric primitives. == Authentication == Anonymous key exchange, like Diffie–Hellman, does not provide authentication of the parties, and is thus vulnerable to man-in-the-middle attacks. A wide variety of cryptographic authentication schemes and protocols have been developed to provide authenticated key agreement to prevent man-in-the-middle and related attacks. These methods generally mathematically bind the agreed key to other agreed-upon data, such as the following: public–private key pairs shared secret keys passwords === Public keys === A widely used mechanism for defeating such attacks is the use of digitally signed keys that must be integrity-assured: if Bob's key is signed by a trusted third party vouching for his identity, Alice can have considerable confidence that a signed key she receives is not an attempt to intercept by Eve. When Alice and Bob have a public-key infrastructure, they may digitally sign an agreed Diffie–Hellman key, or exchanged Diffie–Hellman public keys. Such signed keys, sometimes signed by a certificate authority, are one of the primary mechanisms used for secure web traffic (including HTTPS, SSL or TLS protocols). Other specific examples are MQV, YAK and the ISAKMP component of the IPsec protocol suite for securing Internet Protocol communications. However, these systems require care in endorsing the match between identity information and public keys by certificate authorities in order to work properly. === Hybrid systems === Hybrid systems use public-key cryptography to exchange secret keys, which are then used in a symmetric-key cryptography systems. Most practical applications of cryptography use a combination of cryptographic functions to implement an overall system that provides all of the four desirable features of secure communications (confidentiality, integrity, authentication, and non-repudiation). === Passwords === Password-authenticated key agreement protocols require the separate establishment of a password (which may be smaller than a key) in a manner that is both private and integrity-assured. These are designed to resist man-in-the-middle and other active attacks on the password and the established keys. For example, DH-EKE, SPEKE, and SRP are password-authenticated variations of Diffie–Hellman. === Other tricks === If one has an integrity-assured way to verify a shared key over a public channel, one may engage in a Diffie–Hellman key exchange to derive a short-term shared key, and then subsequently authenticate that the keys match. One way is to use a voice-authenticated read-out of the key, as in PGPfone. Voice authentication, however, presumes that it is infeasible for a man-in-the-middle to spoof one participant's voice to the other in real-time, which may be an undesirable assumption. Such protocols may be designed to work with even a small public value, such as a password. Variations on this theme have been proposed for Bluetooth pairing protocols. In an attempt to avoid using any additional out-of-band authentication factors, Davies and Price proposed the use of the interlock protocol of Ron Rivest and Adi Shamir, which has been subject to both attack and subsequent refinement.

    Read more →
  • Chunked transfer encoding

    Chunked transfer encoding

    Chunked transfer encoding is a streaming data transfer mechanism available in Hypertext Transfer Protocol (HTTP) version 1.1, defined in RFC 9112 §7.1. In chunked transfer encoding, the data stream is divided into a series of non-overlapping "chunks". The chunks are sent out and received independently of one another. At any given time, no knowledge of the data stream outside the currently-being-processed chunk is necessary for either the sender or the receiver. Each chunk is preceded by its size in bytes and transmission ends when a zero-length chunk is received. The chunked keyword in the Transfer-Encoding header is used to indicate chunked transfer. Chunked transfer encoding is not supported in HTTP/2, which provides its own mechanisms for data streaming. == Rationale == The introduction of chunked encoding provided various benefits: Chunked transfer encoding allows a server to maintain an HTTP persistent connection for dynamically generated content. In this case, the HTTP Content-Length header cannot be used to delimit the content and the next HTTP request/response, as the content size is not yet known. Chunked encoding has the benefit that it is not necessary to generate the full content before writing the header, as it allows streaming of content as chunks and explicitly signaling the end of the content, making the connection available for the next HTTP request/response. Chunked encoding allows the sender to send additional header fields after the message body. This is important in cases where values of a field cannot be known until the content has been produced, such as when the content of the message must be digitally signed. Without chunked encoding, the sender would have to buffer the content until it was complete in order to calculate a field value and send it before the content. == Applicability == For version 1.1 of the HTTP protocol, the chunked transfer mechanism is considered to be always and anyway acceptable, even if not listed in the Transfer-Encoding (TE) request header field, and when used with other transfer mechanisms, should always be applied last to the transferred data and never more than one time. This transfer encoding method also allows additional entity header fields to be sent after the last chunk if the client specified the "trailers" parameter as an argument of the TE request field. The origin server of the response can also decide to send additional entity trailers even if the client did not specify the "trailers" parameter, but only if the metadata is optional (i.e. the client can use the received entity without them). Whenever the trailers are used, the server should list their names in the Trailer header field; three header field types are specifically prohibited from appearing as a trailer field: Content-Length, Trailer, and Transfer-Encoding. == Format == If a Transfer-Encoding field with a value of "chunked" is specified in an HTTP message (either a request sent by a client or the response from the server), the body of the message consists of one or more chunks and one terminating chunk with an optional trailer before the final ␍␊ sequence (i.e. carriage return followed by line feed). Each chunk starts with the number of octets of the data it embeds expressed as a hexadecimal number in ASCII followed by optional parameters (chunk extension) and a terminating ␍␊ sequence, followed by the chunk data. The chunk is terminated by ␍␊. If chunk extensions are provided, the chunk size is terminated by a semicolon and followed by the parameters, each also delimited by semicolons. Each parameter is encoded as an extension name followed by an optional equal sign and value. These parameters could be used for a running message digest or digital signature, or to indicate an estimated transfer progress, for instance. The terminating chunk is a special chunk of zero length. It may contain a trailer, which consists of a (possibly empty) sequence of entity header fields. Normally, such header fields would be sent in the message's header; however, it may be more efficient to determine them after processing the entire message entity. In that case, it is useful to send those headers in the trailer. Header fields that regulate the use of trailers are Transfer-Encoding with the "trailers" parameter (used in requests) and Trailer (used in responses). == Use with compression == HTTP servers often use compression to optimize transmission, for example with Content-Encoding: gzip or Content-Encoding: deflate. If both compression and chunked encoding are enabled, then the content stream is first compressed, then chunked; so the chunk encoding itself is not compressed, and the data in each chunk is compressed holistically (i.e. based on the whole content). The remote endpoint then decodes the stream by concatenating the chunks and uncompressing the result. == Example == === Encoded data === The following example contains three chunks of size 4, 7, and 11 (hexadecimal "B") octets of data. 4␍␊Wiki␍␊7␍␊pedia i␍␊B␍␊n ␍␊chunks.␍␊0␍␊␍␊ Below is an annotated version of the encoded data. 4␍␊ (chunk size is four octets) Wiki (four octets of data) ␍␊ (end of chunk) 7␍␊ (chunk size is seven octets) pedia i (seven octets of data) ␍␊ (end of chunk) B␍␊ (chunk size is eleven octets) n ␍␊chunks. (eleven octets of data) ␍␊ (end of chunk) 0␍␊ (chunk size is zero octets, no more chunks) ␍␊ (end of final chunk with zero data octets) Note: Each chunk's size excludes the two ␍␊ bytes that terminate the data of each chunk. === Decoded data === Decoding the above example produces the following octets: Wikipedia in ␍␊chunks. The bytes above are typically displayed as Wikipedia in chunks.

    Read more →
  • Perfectly Imperfect (platform)

    Perfectly Imperfect (platform)

    Perfectly Imperfect is an online newsletter and social media platform. It was initially founded in 2020 as a biweekly email newsletter that focused on recommendations. In January 2024, Perfectly Imperfect launched PI.FYI, a social media platform. The platform is based around sharing recommendations. Its main feed is presented in reverse chronological order and is not algorithmically curated. == History == Perfectly Imperfect was started during the COVID-19 pandemic by Tyler Bainbridge, alongside college friends Alex Cushing and Serey Morm, whom he met at UMass Lowell; Morm later departed. Motivated by a dissatisfaction with algorithm-driven recommendation culture, they launched on Substack in September 2020. Its early newsletter format, PI, published brief recommendation lists and personal notes from contributors. Contributors have included a mix of underground artists and more established creative figures, such as Charli XCX, Chloe Cherry, Chloe Wise, and Meetka Otto. In October 2024, PI announced it was leaving Substack to launch its own site. == Overview == The current platform, PI.FYI, features both editorial content (guest columns, long-form essays, staff picks) and user-generated recommendations. The platform also supports "Ask" posts, where users can solicit recommendations from the community, and allows commenting, liking, and profile customization. In August 2025, it launched an events feature. In 2022, Perfectly Imperfect hosted their first offline event at Baby's All Right in Brooklyn, with a performance by The Dare. They have since expanded their event promotion/sponsorship to markets such as Los Angeles, San Francisco, and even Auckland.

    Read more →
  • Snap (computer graphics)

    Snap (computer graphics)

    In computer graphics, snapping allows an object to be easily positioned in alignment with grid lines, guide lines or another object, by causing it to automatically jump to an exact position when the user drags it to the proximity of the desired location. Some CAD software provides a "Snap" pull-down menu with diverse options as preferences for the practice of the operation. In Windows, with the "snap windows" option enabled, snapping a window against the top (or side) edge of the screen causes it to change into full screen (or half-screen for multitasking). Software snapping is analogous to hardware detents which serve to indicate discrete values or steps of an input device.

    Read more →
  • Hybrid argument (cryptography)

    Hybrid argument (cryptography)

    In cryptography, the hybrid argument is a proof technique used to show that two distributions are computationally indistinguishable. == History == Hybrid arguments had their origin in a papers by Andrew Yao in 1982 and Shafi Goldwasser and Silvio Micali in 1983. == Formal description == Formally, to show two distributions D1 and D2 are computationally indistinguishable, we can define a sequence of hybrid distributions D1 := H0, H1, ..., Ht =: D2 where t is polynomial in the security parameter n. Define the advantage of any probabilistic efficient (polynomial-bounded time) algorithm A as A d v H i , H i + 1 d i s t ( A ) := | Pr [ x ← $ H i : A ( x ) = 1 ] − Pr [ x ← $ H i + 1 : A ( x ) = 1 ] | , {\displaystyle {\mathsf {Adv}}_{H_{i},H_{i+1}}^{\mathsf {dist}}(\mathbf {A} ):=\left|\Pr[x{\stackrel {\$}{\gets }}H_{i}:\mathbf {A} (x)=1]-\Pr[x{\stackrel {\$}{\gets }}H_{i+1}:\mathbf {A} (x)=1]\right|,} where the dollar symbol ($) denotes that we sample an element from the distribution at random. By triangle inequality, it is clear that for any probabilistic polynomial time algorithm A, A d v D 1 , D 2 d i s t ( A ) ≤ ∑ i = 0 t − 1 A d v H i , H i + 1 d i s t ( A ) . {\displaystyle {\mathsf {Adv}}_{D_{1},D_{2}}^{\mathsf {dist}}(\mathbf {A} )\leq \sum _{i=0}^{t-1}{\mathsf {Adv}}_{H_{i},H_{i+1}}^{\mathsf {dist}}(\mathbf {A} ).} Thus there must exist some k s.t. 0 ≤ k < t(n) and A d v H k , H k + 1 d i s t ( A ) ≥ A d v D 1 , D 2 d i s t ( A ) / t ( n ) . {\displaystyle {\mathsf {Adv}}_{H_{k},H_{k+1}}^{\mathsf {dist}}(\mathbf {A} )\geq {\mathsf {Adv}}_{D_{1},D_{2}}^{\mathsf {dist}}(\mathbf {A} )/t(n).} Since t is polynomial-bounded, for any such algorithm A, if we can show that it has a fixed negligible advantage function ε(n) between distributions Hi and Hi+1 for every i, so in particular, ϵ ( n ) ≥ A d v H k , H k + 1 d i s t ( A ) ≥ A d v D 1 , D 2 d i s t ( A ) / t ( n ) , {\displaystyle \epsilon (n)\geq {\mathsf {Adv}}_{H_{k},H_{k+1}}^{\mathsf {dist}}(\mathbf {A} )\geq {\mathsf {Adv}}_{D_{1},D_{2}}^{\mathsf {dist}}(\mathbf {A} )/t(n),} then it immediately follows that its advantage to distinguish the distributions D1 = H0 and D2 = Ht must also be negligible. == Applications == The hybrid argument is extensively used in cryptography. Some simple proofs using hybrid arguments are: If one cannot efficiently predict the next bit of the output of some number generator, then this generator is a pseudorandom number generator (PRG). We can securely expand a PRG with 1-bit output into a PRG with n-bit output.

    Read more →
  • Content format

    Content format

    A content format is an encoded format for converting a specific type of data to displayable information. Content formats are used in recording and transmission to prepare data for observation or interpretation. This includes both analog and digitized content. Content formats may be recorded and read by either natural or manufactured tools and mechanisms. In addition to converting data to information, a content format may include the encryption and/or scrambling of that information. Multiple content formats may be contained within a single section of a storage medium (e.g. track, disk sector, computer file, document, page, column) or transmitted via a single channel (e.g. wire, carrier wave) of a transmission medium. With multimedia, multiple tracks containing multiple content formats are presented simultaneously. Content formats may either be recorded in secondary signal processing methods such as a software container format (e.g. digital audio, digital video) or recorded in the primary format (e.g. spectrogram, pictogram). Observable data is often known as raw data, or raw content. A primary raw content format may be directly observable (e.g. image, sound, motion, smell, sensation) or physical data which only requires hardware to display it, such as a phonographic needle and diaphragm or a projector lamp and magnifying glass. The following are examples of some common content formats and content format categories (covering: sensory experience, model, and language used for encoding information):

    Read more →