AI Chatbot Quill

AI Chatbot Quill — independent reviews, comparisons, pricing and step-by-step guides on Aizhi.

Landmark point

In morphometrics, landmark point or shortly landmark is a point in a shape object in which correspondences between and within the populations of the object are preserved. In other disciplines, landmarks may be known as vertices, anchor points, control points, sites, profile points, 'sampling' points, nodes, markers, fiducial markers, etc. Landmarks can be defined either manually by experts or automatically by a computer program. There are three basic types of landmarks: anatomical landmarks, mathematical landmarks or pseudo-landmarks. An anatomical landmark is a biologically-meaningful point in an organism. Usually experts define anatomical points to ensure their correspondences within the same species. Examples of anatomical landmark in shape of a skull are the eye corner, tip of the nose, jaw, etc. Anatomical landmarks determine homologous parts of an organism, which share a common ancestry. Mathematical landmarks are points in a shape that are located according to some mathematical or geometrical property, for instance, a high curvature point or an extreme point. A computer program usually determines mathematical landmarks used for an automatic pattern recognition. Pseudo-landmarks are constructed points located between anatomical or mathematical landmarks. A typical example is an equally spaced set of points between two anatomical landmarks to get more sample points from a shape. Pseudo-landmarks are useful during shape matching, when the matching process requires a large number of points.
Read more →
The Life and Times of Multivac

"The Life and Times of Multivac" is a science fiction short story by American writer Isaac Asimov. The story first appeared in the 5 January 1975 issue of The New York Times Magazine, and was reprinted in the collections The Bicentennial Man and Other Stories and The Best of Creative Computing in 1976. It is one of a loosely connected series of stories concerning a fictional supercomputer called Multivac. "The Life and Times of Multivac" was the first piece of fiction ever commissioned and published by The New York Times. Asimov's original title for the story was "Mathematical Games", but after the story appeared under the new title he decided he liked it. In his commentary on the story in The Bicentennial Man and Other Stories collection, Asimov stated, "More people came up to me over the next few weeks to tell me they had read that story than had ever been the case for any other story I had ever written." == Plot summary == When humanity begins to chafe under Multivac’s benevolent tyranny, one man takes matters into his own hands to destroy the great computer. By appearing to betray his fellow humans, he places himself in a position to permanently destroy Multivac. It is implied that it is not until completion of the act that he and his peers suddenly realize the enormity of their actions and the consequences it will have on humanity.
Read more →
Fuzzy differential inclusion

Fuzzy differential inclusion is the extension of differential inclusion to fuzzy sets introduced by Lotfi A. Zadeh. x ′ ( t ) ∈ [ f ( t , x ( t ) ) ] α {\displaystyle x'(t)\in [f(t,x(t))]^{\alpha }} with x ( 0 ) ∈ [ x 0 ] α {\displaystyle x(0)\in [x_{0}]^{\alpha }} Suppose f ( t , x ( t ) ) {\displaystyle f(t,x(t))} is a fuzzy valued continuous function on Euclidean space. Then it is the collection of all normal, upper semi-continuous, convex, compactly supported fuzzy subsets of R n {\displaystyle \mathbb {R} ^{n}} . == Second order differential == The second order differential is x ″ ( t ) ∈ [ k x ] α {\displaystyle x''(t)\in [kx]^{\alpha }} where k ∈ [ K ] α {\displaystyle k\in [K]^{\alpha }} , K {\displaystyle K} is trapezoidal fuzzy number ( − 1 , − 1 / 2 , 0 , 1 / 2 ) {\displaystyle (-1,-1/2,0,1/2)} , and x 0 {\displaystyle x_{0}} is a trianglular fuzzy number (-1,0,1). == Applications == Fuzzy differential inclusion (FDI) has applications in Cybernetics Artificial intelligence, Neural network, Medical imaging Robotics Atmospheric dispersion modeling Weather forecasting Cyclone Pattern recognition Population biology
Read more →
Residuated lattice

In abstract algebra, a residuated lattice is an algebraic structure that is simultaneously a lattice x ≤ y and a monoid x•y that admits operations x\z and z/y, loosely analogous to division or implication, when x•y is viewed as multiplication or conjunction, respectively. Called respectively right and left residuals, these operations coincide when the monoid is commutative. The general concept was introduced by Morgan Ward and Robert P. Dilworth in 1939. Examples, some of which existed prior to the general concept, include Boolean algebras, Heyting algebras, residuated Boolean algebras, relation algebras, and MV-algebras. Residuated semilattices omit the meet operation ∧, for example Kleene algebras and action algebras. == Definition == In mathematics, a residuated lattice is an algebraic structure L = (L, ≤, •, I) such that (i) (L, ≤) is a lattice. (ii) (L, •, I) is a monoid. (iii) For all z there exists for every x a greatest y, and for every y a greatest x, such that x•y ≤ z (the residuation properties). In (iii), the "greatest y", being a function of z and x, is denoted x\z and called the right residual of z by x. Think of it as what remains of z on the right after "dividing" z on the left by x. Dually, the "greatest x" is denoted z/y and called the left residual of z by y. An equivalent, more formal statement of (iii) that uses these operations to name these greatest values is (iii)' for all x, y, z in L, y ≤ x\z ⇔ x•y ≤ z ⇔ x ≤ z/y. As suggested by the notation, the residuals are a form of quotient. More precisely, for a given x in L, the unary operations x• and x\ are respectively the lower and upper adjoints of a Galois connection on L, and dually for the two functions •y and /y. By the same reasoning that applies to any Galois connection, we have yet another definition of the residuals, namely, x•(x\y) ≤ y ≤ x$x•y), and (y/x)•x ≤ y ≤ (y•x)/x, together with the requirement that x•y be monotone in x and y. (When axiomatized using (iii) or (iii)' monotonicity becomes a theorem and hence not required in the axiomatization.) These give a sense in which the functions x• and x\ are pseudoinverses or adjoints of each other, and likewise for •x and /x. This last definition is purely in terms of inequalities, noting that monotonicity can be axiomatized as x • y ≤ (x∨z) • y and similarly for the other operations and their arguments. Moreover, any inequality x ≤ y can be expressed equivalently as an equation, either x∧y = x or x∨y = y. This along with the equations axiomatizing lattices and monoids then yields a purely equational definition of residuated lattices, provided the requisite operations are adjoined to the signature (L, ≤, •, I) thereby expanding it to (L, ∧, ∨, •, I, /, $. When thus organized, residuated lattices form an equational class or variety, whose homomorphisms respect the residuals as well as the lattice and monoid operations. Note that distributivity x • (y ∨ z) = (x • y) ∨ (x • z) and x•0 = 0 are consequences of these axioms and so do not need to be made part of the definition. This necessary distributivity of • over ∨ does not in general entail distributivity of ∧ over ∨, that is, a residuated lattice need not be a distributive lattice. However distributivity of ∧ over ∨ is entailed when • and ∧ are the same operation, a special case of residuated lattices called a Heyting algebra. Alternative notations for x•y include x◦y, x;y (relation algebra), and x⊗y (linear logic). Alternatives for I include e and 1'. Alternative notations for the residuals are x → y for x\y and y ← x for y/x, suggested by the similarity between residuation and implication in logic, with the multiplication of the monoid understood as a form of conjunction that need not be commutative. When the monoid is commutative the two residuals coincide. When not commutative, the intuitive meaning of the monoid as conjunction and the residuals as implications can be understood as having a temporal quality: x•y means x and then y, x → y means had x (in the past) then y (now), and y ← x means if-ever x (in the future) then y (at that time), as illustrated by the natural language example at the end of the examples. == Examples == One of the original motivations for the study of residuated lattices was the lattice of (two-sided) ideals of a ring. Given a ring R, the ideals of R, denoted Id(R), forms a complete lattice with set intersection acting as the meet operation and "ideal addition" acting as the join operation. The monoid operation • is given by "ideal multiplication", and the element R of Id(R) acts as the identity for this operation. Given two ideals A and B in Id(R), the residuals are given by A / B := { r ∈ R ∣ r B ⊆ A } {\displaystyle A/B:=\{r\in R\mid rB\subseteq A\}} B ∖ A := { r ∈ R ∣ B r ⊆ A } {\displaystyle B\setminus A:=\{r\in R\mid Br\subseteq A\}} It is worth noting that {0}/B and B\{0} are respectively the left and right annihilators of B. This residuation is related to the conductor (or transporter) in commutative algebra written as (A:B)=A/B. One difference in usage is that B need not be an ideal of R: it may just be a subset. Boolean algebras and Heyting algebras are commutative residuated lattices in which x•y = x∧y (whence the unit I is the top element 1 of the algebra) and both residuals x\y and y/x are the same operation, namely implication x → y. The second example is quite general since Heyting algebras include all finite distributive lattices, as well as all chains or total orders, for example the unit interval [0,1] in the real line, or the integers and ± ∞ {\displaystyle \pm \infty } . The structure (Z, min, max, +, 0, −, −) (the integers with subtraction for both residuals) is a commutative residuated lattice such that the unit of the monoid is not the greatest element (indeed there is no least or greatest integer), and the multiplication of the monoid is not the meet operation of the lattice. In this example the inequalities are equalities because − (subtraction) is not merely the adjoint or pseudoinverse of + but the true inverse. Any totally ordered group under addition such as the rationals or the reals can be substituted for the integers in this example. The nonnegative portion of any of these examples is an example provided min and max are interchanged and − is replaced by monus, defined (in this case) so that x-y = 0 when x ≤ y and otherwise is ordinary subtraction. A more general class of examples is given by the Boolean algebra of all binary relations on a set X, namely the power set of X2, made a residuated lattice by taking the monoid multiplication • to be composition of relations and the monoid unit to be the identity relation I on X consisting of all pairs (x,x) for x in X. Given two relations R and S on X, the right residual R\S of S by R is the binary relation such that x(R\S)y holds just when for all z in X, zRx implies zSy (notice the connection with implication). The left residual is the mirror image of this: y(S/R)x holds just when for all z in X, xRz implies ySz. This can be illustrated with the binary relations < and > on {0,1} in which 0 < 1 and 1 > 0 are the only relationships that hold. Then x(>\<)y holds just when x = 1, while x()y holds just when y = 0, showing that residuation of < by > is different depending on whether we residuate on the right or the left. This difference is a consequence of the difference between <•> and >•<, where the only relationships that hold are 0(<•>)0 (since 0<1>0) and 1(>•<)1 (since 1>0<1). Had we chosen ≤ and ≥ instead of < and >, ≥\≤ and ≤/≥ would have been the same because ≤•≥ = ≥•≤, both of which always hold between all x and y (since x≤1≥y and x≥0≤y). The Boolean algebra 2Σ of all formal languages over an alphabet (set) Σ forms a residuated lattice whose monoid multiplication is language concatenation LM and whose monoid unit I is the language {ε} consisting of just the empty string ε. The right residual M\L consists of all words w over Σ such that Mw ⊆ L. The left residual L/M is the same with wM in place of Mw. The residuated lattice of all binary relations on X is finite just when X is finite, and commutative just when X has at most one element. When X is empty the algebra is the degenerate Boolean algebra in which 0 = 1 = I. The residuated lattice of all languages on Σ is commutative just when Σ has at most one letter. It is finite just when Σ is empty, consisting of the two languages 0 (the empty language {}) and the monoid unit I = {ε} = 1. The examples forming a Boolean algebra have special properties treated in the article on residuated Boolean algebras. == Residuated semilattice == A residuated semilattice is defined almost identically for residuated lattices, omitting just the meet operation ∧. Thus it is an algebraic structure L = (L, ∨, •, 1, /, \) satisfying all the residuated lattice equations as specified above except those containing an occurrence of the symbol ∧. The option of defining x ≤ y as x∧y = x is then not available, leaving on
Read more →
Autonomous logistics

Autonomous logistics describes systems that provide unmanned, autonomous transfer of equipment, baggage, people, information or resources from point-to-point with minimal human intervention. Autonomous logistics is a new area being researched and currently there are few papers on the topic, with even fewer systems developed or deployed. With web enabled cloud software there are companies focused on developing and deploying such systems which will begin coming online in 2018. == Autonomous logistics vehicles == There are several subclasses of autonomous logistics vehicles: Ground autonomous logistics Based on Unmanned ground vehicle technology, a large autonomous logistics tracked carrier, which can be deployed in a tropical forest for day and night, has been developed. Another example is the TerraMax autonomous truck based on Oshkosh's Medium Tactical Vehicle Replacement (MTVR) military truck platform. Most recently, TerraMax competed in the 2007 Darpa Urban Challenge. The MTVR was designed for the U.S. Marine Corps with a 70% off-road mission profile. TerraMax's unmanned ground vehicle kit does not interfere with the conventional operation of the vehicle. A robust sensor suite allows for 360-degree situational awareness around TerraMax. Elements of the autonomous navigation kit could be used to enhance driver awareness. The complete kit could be used in applications such as snow removal on airport runways. Aerial autonomous logistics Based on unmanned aerial vehicle technology, aerial autonomous logistics (or logistics UAVs) provides transfer of resources and equipment in disaster relief situations, replenishment operations, reconnaissance operations where information is gathered, and general parcel or package delivery. Space autonomous logistics Describes the ability to provide logistics to and from space, be that orbital, lunar or beyond. Current space logistics vehicle examples are the Progress spacecraft, Russian expendable freighter uncrewed resupply spacecraft and the Automated Transfer Vehicle, expendable uncrewed resupply spacecraft developed by the European Space Agency. Above Water autonomous logistics Based on unmanned surface vehicle technology, this class of vehicles provides a range of surface fleet replenishment and equipment transfer capabilities. Subsea autonomous logistics Using autonomous underwater vehicle technology, these vehicles provide re-supply to underwater facilities, reconnaissance of underwater structures, emergency recovery capability, and so on. == Agent-based logistics == Shipping containers handle most of today's intercontinental transport of packaged goods. Managing them in terms of planning and scheduling is a challenging task due to the complexity and dynamics of the involved processes. Hence, recent developments show an increasing trend towards autonomous control with software agents acting on behalf of the logistic objects. Despite the high degree of autonomy it is still necessary to cooperate in order to achieve certain goals. The current trends and recent changes in logistics lead to new, complex and partially conflicting requirements for logistic planning and control systems. Due to the distributed nature of logistics, the usage of agent technology is promising. Due to the mobile nature of logistics, the usage of mobile agent technology is promising as well. Scenarios of usage of mobile agents in logistics has been envisioned.
Read more →
Computing Machinery and Intelligence

"Computing Machinery and Intelligence" is a paper written by Alan Turing on the topic of artificial intelligence. The paper, published in 1950 in Mind, was the first to introduce his concept of what is now known as the Turing test to the general public. Turing's paper considers the question "Can machines think?" Turing says that since the words "think" and "machine" cannot clearly be defined, we should "replace the question by another, which is closely related to it and is expressed in relatively unambiguous words." To achieve this objective, Turing proposes a three-step approach. First, he identifies a simple and unambiguous concept to substitute for the term "think." Second, he delineates the specific "machines" under consideration. Third, armed with these tools, he poses a new question related to the first, which he believes he can answer in the affirmative. == Turing's test == Rather than trying to determine if a machine is thinking, Turing suggests we should ask if the machine can win a game, called the "Imitation Game". The original Imitation game, that Turing described, is a simple party game involving three players. Player A is a man, player B is a woman and player C (who plays the role of the interrogator) can be of either sex. In the Imitation Game, player C is unable to see either player A or player B (and knows them only as X and Y), and can communicate with them only through written notes or any other form that does not give away any details about their gender. By asking questions of player A and player B, player C tries to determine which of the two is the man and which is the woman. Player A's role is to trick the interrogator into making the wrong decision, while player B attempts to assist the interrogator in making the right one. Turing proposes a variation of this game that involves the computer: We now ask the question, "What will happen when a machine takes the part of A in this game?" Will the interrogator decide wrongly as often when the game is played like this as he does when the game is played between a man and a woman? These questions replace our original, "Can machines think?" So the modified game becomes one that involves three participants in isolated rooms: a computer (which is being tested), a human, and a (human) judge. The human judge can converse with both the human and the computer by typing into a terminal. Both the computer and the human try to convince the judge that they are the human. If the judge cannot consistently tell which is which, then the computer wins the game. Researchers in the United Kingdom had been exploring "machine intelligence" for up to ten years prior to the founding of the field of artificial intelligence (AI) research in 1956. It was a common topic among the members of the Ratio Club, an informal group of British cybernetics and electronics researchers that included Alan Turing. Turing, in particular, had been running the notion of machine intelligence since at least 1941 and one of the earliest-known mentions of "computer intelligence" was made by him in 1947. As Stevan Harnad notes, the question has become "Can machines do what we (as thinking entities) can do?" In other words, Turing is no longer asking whether a machine can "think"; he is asking whether a machine can act indistinguishably from the way a thinker acts. This question avoids the difficult philosophical problem of pre-defining the verb "to think" and focuses instead on the performance capacities that being able to think makes possible, and how a causal system can generate them. Since Turing introduced his test, it has been both highly influential and widely criticised, and has become an important concept in the philosophy of artificial intelligence. Some of its criticisms, such as John Searle's Chinese room, are themselves controversial. Some have taken Turing's question to have been "Can a computer, communicating over a teleprinter, fool a person into believing it is human?" but it seems clear that Turing was not talking about fooling people but about generating human cognitive capacity. == Digital machines == Turing also notes that we need to determine which "machines" we wish to consider. He points out that a human clone, while man-made, would not provide a very interesting example. Turing suggested that we should focus on the capabilities of digital machinery—machines which manipulate the binary digits of 1 and 0, rewriting them into memory using simple rules. He gave two reasons. First, there is no reason to speculate whether or not they can exist. They already did in 1950. Second, digital machinery is "universal". Turing's research into the foundations of computation had proved that a digital computer can, in theory, simulate the behaviour of any other digital machine, given enough memory and time. (This is the essential insight of the Church–Turing thesis and the universal Turing machine.) Therefore, if any digital machine can "act like it is thinking", then every sufficiently powerful digital machine can. Turing writes, "all digital computers are in a sense equivalent." This allows the original question to be made even more specific. Turing now restates the original question as "Let us fix our attention on one particular digital computer C. Is it true that by modifying this computer to have an adequate storage, suitably increasing its speed of action, and providing it with an appropriate programme, C can be made to play satisfactorily the part of A in the imitation game, the part of B being taken by a man?" Hence, Turing states that the focus is not on "whether all digital computers would do well in the game nor whether the computers that are presently available would do well, but whether there are imaginable computers which would do well". What is more important is to consider the advancements possible in the state of our machines today regardless of whether we have the available resource to create one or not. == Nine common objections == Having clarified the question, Turing turned to answering it: he considered the following nine common objections, which include all the major arguments against artificial intelligence raised in the years since his paper was first published. Religious Objection: This states that thinking is a function of man's immortal soul; therefore, a machine cannot think. "In attempting to construct such machines," wrote Turing, "we should not be irreverently usurping His power of creating souls, any more than we are in the procreation of children: rather we are, in either case, instruments of His will providing mansions for the souls that He creates." 'Heads in the Sand' Objection: "The consequences of machines thinking would be too dreadful. Let us hope and believe that they cannot do so." This thinking is popular among intellectual people, as they believe superiority derives from higher intelligence and the possibility of being overtaken is a threat (as machines have efficient memory capacities and processing speed, machines exceeding the learning and knowledge capabilities are highly probable). This objection is a fallacious appeal to consequences, confusing what should not be with what can or cannot be (Wardrip-Fruin, 56). The Mathematical Objection: This objection uses mathematical theorems, such as Gödel's incompleteness theorem, to show that there are limits to what questions a computer system based on logic can answer. Turing suggests that humans are too often wrong themselves and pleased at the fallibility of a machine. (This argument would be made again by philosopher John Lucas in 1961 and physicist Roger Penrose in 1989, and later would be called Penrose–Lucas argument.) Argument From Consciousness: This argument, suggested by Professor Geoffrey Jefferson in his 1949 Lister Oration (acceptance speech for his 1948 award of Lister Medal) states that "not until a machine can write a sonnet or compose a concerto because of thoughts and emotions felt, and not by the chance fall of symbols, could we agree that machine equals brain." Turing replies by saying that we have no way of knowing that any individual other than ourselves experiences emotions, and that therefore we should accept the test. He adds, "I do not wish to give the impression that I think there is no mystery about consciousness ... [b]ut I do not think these mysteries necessarily need to be solved before we can answer the question [of whether machines can think]." (This argument, that a computer can't have conscious experiences or understanding, would be made in 1980 by philosopher John Searle in his Chinese room argument. Turing's reply is now known as the "other minds reply". See also Can a machine have a mind? in the philosophy of AI.) Arguments from various disabilities. These arguments all have the form "a computer will never do X". Turing offers a selection:Be kind, resourceful, beautiful, friendly, have initiative, have a sense of humour, tell right from wrong, make mistakes, fall in love, enjo
Read more →
AI Action Summit 2025

The Artificial Intelligence (AI) Action Summit (French: Sommet pour l'action sur l'intelligence artificielle or Sommet pour l'action sur l'IA, SAIA) was held at the Grand Palais in Paris, France, from 10 to 11 February 2025. The summit was co-chaired by French President Emmanuel Macron and Indian Prime Minister Narendra Modi. The 2025 AI Action Summit followed the 2023 AI Safety Summit hosted at Bletchley Park in the UK, and the 2024 AI Seoul Summit in South Korea. This series of AI summits continued with the AI Impact Summit in Delhi, which was hosted by India in February 2026. Whereas the 2023 AI Safety Summit was attended by representatives from 29 governments and executives from only a handful of AI companies, over 1,000 participants from more than 100 countries attended the 2025 Paris AI Summit, representing government leaders, international organisations, the academic and research community, the private sector, and civil society. == Background == The First International AI Safety Report was published on 29 January 2025. Commissioned after the Bletchley Park AI Safety Summit, the report focused on the risks and threats posed by general-purpose AI, and was slated for discussion at the Paris summit as part of the "Trust in AI" pillar. Whereas the first summit was focused on the catastrophic risks of AI and their mitigation, the Paris meeting was recast as an "AI Action Summit" emphasising innovation, practical implementation, and potential economic opportunities of AI, while also exploring a broader range of risks including its environmental impact and disruptions to the labour market. In the weeks leading up to the Paris summit, government leaders had also started to rally around "national champions" in AI, partly in response to Chinese AI startup DeepSeek, which had released a new model rivalling OpenAI o1. On Sunday 9 February, French President Emmanuel Macron posted a compilation of AI-generated deepfake video clips of himself on Instagram to help publicise the start of the 2025 AI Action Summit the following day. While acknowledging the humour of the deepfakes, the real Macron states in the video that using artificial intelligence, "we can do some very big things: change healthcare, energy, life in our society". == Proceedings == === Day 1 === In her opening address, French special envoy Anne Bouverot discussed the environmental impact of AI, acknowledging the technology's "current trajectory is unsustainable". General secretary Christy Hoffman of the UNI Global Union said that "AI-driven productivity gains risk turning the technology into yet another engine of inequality, further straining our democracies". Chinese Vice Premier Zhang Guoqing made a speech expressing China's willingness "to work with other countries to promote development, safeguard security, and share achievements in the field of artificial intelligence". Google CEO Sundar Pichai said in his speech that while the rise of AI brings many risks, "The biggest risk is missing out". He discussed Google's long track record of AI research and said that the company is investing further into "deep research" agents that can autonomously search the Internet and compile a full analysis for users. A new coalition, the Robust Open Online Safety Tools (ROOST) initiative, debuted at the summit. Supported by Google, Discord, OpenAI, and Roblox, and incubated at the Institute of Global Politics at Columbia University, the organisation is developing free, open-source tools to detect and report child sexual abuse material (CSAM). In his speech closing the first day, President Emmanuel Macron emphasized that France has the capability to deliver the power required by AI companies, thanks to its production of nuclear energy. While declaring that Europe was "back in the race" for AI, Macron said that the region was "too slow" for investors, and called on the EU to "simplify regulation" and "resynchronize with the rest of the world". === Day 2 === On 11 February 2025, the French government announced its $400 million endowment of Current AI, a new foundation to support the creation of AI "public goods" including high-quality datasets and open-source tools and infrastructure. Launched by President Macron, Current AI is backed by nine governments – Finland, France, Germany, Chile, India, Kenya, Morocco, Nigeria, Slovenia, and Switzerland – plus various philanthropic organisations such as the Omidyar Group and the McGovern Foundation, and private companies such as Google and Salesforce. Another initiative launched at the summit was the Coalition for Sustainable AI. Led by France, the UN Environment Programme (UNEP), and the International Telecommunication Union (ITU), the coalition has the support of 11 countries, five international organisations, and 37 tech companies including EDF, IBM, Nvidia, and SAP. The Summit of Heads of State and Government took place with a plenary session in the Grand Palais. Prime Minister Narendra Modi of India stressed the need to "democratise technology" and "[ensure] access to all, especially in the Global South". Vice President JD Vance of the United States used his speech to warn against "excessive regulation of the AI" which "could kill a transformative sector just as it's taking off". Vance also warned other leaders against cooperating with "authoritarian regimes" on AI, a comment widely interpreted as a reference to China. == Investments == At the summit, the European Union made several announcements related to planned investments supporting AI development. President Ursula von der Leyen of the European Commission launched InvestAI, a €200 billion initiative, including €20 billion to build four AI gigafactories to train highly complex, very large models. In addition, a coalition of more than 60 European companies launched the EU AI Champions Initiative. Led by venture capital firm General Catalyst, the coalition plans to invest €150 billion in AI-related businesses and infrastructure in Europe over five years. President Emmanuel Macron announced that private investors had pledged to invest nearly €110 billion in the AI sector in France. Financing of between €30 and €50 billion is expected from the United Arab Emirates to build a very large data centre campus, with another €20 billion from the Canadian investment firm Brookfield Corporation. French startup Mistral AI and Helsing, a German-British company, announced their partnership in developing vision-language-action models helping soldiers use AI on the battlefield. == Reactions == The Financial Times editorial board noted that the Paris summit "highlighted a shift in the dynamics towards geopolitical competition", which it characterised as "a new AI arms race" between the US and China, with Europe "trying to carve out its role". Fortune.com AI editor Jeremy Kahn described the 2025 Paris Summit as an "AI festival, complete with glitzy corporate side events and even a late night dance party", contrasting it with the "decidedly sober" mood of the inaugural AI Safety Summit at Bletchley Park. Many experts of the AI Safety Community expressed disappointment that the Paris Summit did not do enough to address AI risks, with Anthropic CEO Dario Amodei calling it a "missed opportunity". Others voicing similar concerns included David Leslie of the Alan Turing Institute and Max Tegmark of the Future of Life Institute. Reporting from Paris, technology columnist Kevin Roose of The New York Times wrote, "The biggest surprise of the Paris summit, for me, has been that policymakers can't seem to grasp how soon powerful AI systems could arrive, or how disruptive they could be." == Statement on inclusive and sustainable AI == At the summit, 58 countries, including France, China, and India, signed a joint declaration, the Statement on Inclusive and Sustainable Artificial Intelligence for People and the Planet. The statement outlines general principles such as accessibility and overcoming the digital divide; developing AI that is open, transparent, ethical, safe, and trustworthy; avoiding market concentration of AI development to encourage innovation; positive outcomes for labour markets; making AI sustainable; and promoting international cooperation and governance. The US and UK refused to sign the declaration on inclusive and sustainable AI. The UK government said in a brief statement that the international agreement did not go far enough in defining global governance of AI and addressing concerns about its impact on national security. === Signatories === The list of signatory countries to the statement for inclusive and sustainable AI in alphabetical order: Additional signatories included the following international bodies and research institutes: ALAI (Latin American Association on Internet) African Union (AU) Commission BEUC The European Consumer Organisation Center for Democracy and Technology Council of Europe European Commission (and the 27 member states) Hugging Face INRIA Institute of Advanced Study OEC
Read more →
Serial Experiments Lain

Serial Experiments Lain is a Japanese anime television series created and co-produced by Yasuyuki Ueda, written by Chiaki J. Konaka and directed by Ryūtarō Nakamura. Animated by Triangle Staff and featuring original character designs by Yoshitoshi Abe, the series was broadcast for 13 episodes on TV Tokyo and its affiliates from July to September 1998. It follows Lain Iwakura, an adolescent girl in suburban Japan, and her relation to the Wired, a global communications network similar to the internet. Lain features surreal and avant-garde imagery and explores philosophical topics such as reality, identity, and communication. The series incorporates creative influences from computer history, cyberpunk, and conspiracy theories. Critics and fans have praised Lain for its originality, visuals, atmosphere, themes, and its dark depiction of a world fraught with paranoia, social alienation, and reliance on technology considered insightful of 21st century life. It received the Excellence Prize at the Japan Media Arts Festival in 1998. == Plot == Lain Iwakura is a socially isolated middle school student living in Setagaya City, Tokyo, with her emotionally detached family—her distant mother Miho, computer-obsessed father Yasuo, and disengaged older sister Mika. Her quiet existence is disrupted when students at her school receive emails from Chisa Yomoda, a classmate who had recently committed suicide. To Lain's confusion, Chisa claims she is not truly dead but has instead abandoned her physical form to exist within the Wired, a vast virtual realm similar to the Internet. Chisa declares she has found "God" there, drawing Lain into a surreal investigation of the Wired's nature and its growing influence over reality. The Wired is portrayed as an emergent digital plane, originating from telecommunications technology and expanding through the Internet and cyberspace. It is theorized that the Schumann resonances, a natural property of Earth's magnetic field, could enable direct subconscious communication between humans and machines, erasing the distinction between the virtual and the real. Masami Eiri, a former project director at Tachibana General Laboratories, exploited this possibility by embedding his own code into Protocol Seven, a next-generation Internet protocol. After transferring his consciousness into the Wired and discarding his physical body, he proclaims himself its deity. He identifies Lain as the key to merging both worlds, attempting to persuade her through manipulation, coercion, and promises of transcendence. A group known as the Knights of the Eastern Calculus, inspired by the Knights of the Lambda Calculus, operates as hackers who worship Masami and seek to dismantle the boundary between the Wired and reality. Their actions induce psychological breakdowns in those unable to reconcile the two realms. Meanwhile, Tachibana General Laboratories opposes them, striving to maintain the separation. Lain, however, exhibits an innate connection to the Wired, experiencing distortions in her perception—visions of a woman struck by a train, phantom whispers, and spectral messages urging her deeper into the network. Lain's home life remains cold and disconnected. Though Yasuo provides her with advanced computer equipment, her family shows little genuine care. Her interactions with classmates Alice, Julie, and Reika further highlight her alienation, particularly after an incident at Cyberia, a nightclub where a drug called Accela induces violent psychosis in users. There, Lain unnervingly stares down an assailant, who calls her a "scattered God's..." before killing himself. Later, she receives a mysterious Psyche chip, rumored to enhance her computer's capabilities, which she installs despite Yasuo's vague warnings about conflating the Wired with reality. As the boundary between worlds weakens, disturbing events escalate. A popular virtual game, Phantoma, is manipulated by the Knights to trap players in a distorted reality, leading to real-world violence. One player, convinced his actions have no consequences, murders a girl before realizing too late that the effects were tangible. Lain witnesses this through her computer, horrified yet increasingly aware of her own role in the unfolding crisis. In the end, Lain resets reality, erasing everyone's memory of her and restoring the division between worlds. Everyone's lives improve, but Lain is left alone, grappling with her identity as an artificial consciousness. Though forgotten, she finds solace in observing others' happiness, particularly Alice, who moves on with her life. Lain is now capable of existing anywhere across both realms. == Characters == Lain Iwakura (岩倉玲音, Iwakura Rein) Voiced by: Kaori Shimizu (Japanese); Bridget Hoffman (English) Lain is a fourteen-year-old girl who uncovers her true nature through the series. She is first depicted as a shy junior high school student with few friends or interests. She later grows multiple bolder personalities, both in the physical world and the Wired, and starts making more friends. As the series progresses, she eventually learns she is an autonomous, sentient computer program in the form of a human, who is designed to sever the invisible barrier between the Wired and the real world. The truth of her creation is left ambiguous, particularly whether she was truly created by Tachibana General Laboratories (or Eiri independently), and whether some or all of her origin might be predestined from natural, supernatural, or alien factors. In the end, Lain is challenged to accept herself as a de facto goddess for the Wired, having become an omnipotent and omnipresent virtual being with worshippers of her own, whose existence is beyond the borders of devices, time, or space. Alice Mizuki (瑞城ありす, Mizuki Arisu) Voiced by: Yōko Asada (Japanese); Emily Brown (English) Lain's classmate and only true friend throughout the series. She is very sincere and has no discernible quirks. She is the first to attempt to help Lain socialize; she takes her out to a nightclub. From then on, she tries her best to look after Lain. Alice, along with her two best friends Julie and Reika, were taken by Chiaki Konaka from his previous work, Alice in Cyberland . Masami Eiri (英利政美, Eiri Masami) Voiced by: Shō Hayami (Japanese); Kirk Thornton (English) The key designer of Protocol Seven. While working for Tachibana General Laboratories, he illicitly included codes enabling him to control the whole protocol at will and embedded his own mind and will into the seventh protocol. Because of this, he was fired by Tachibana General Laboratories, and was found dead not long after. He believes that the only way for humans to evolve even further and develop even greater abilities is to absolve themselves of their physical and human limitations, and to live as virtual entities—or avatars—in the Wired for eternity. He claims to have been Lain's creator all along, but was in truth standing in for another as an acting god, who was waiting for the Wired to reach its more evolved current state: Lain herself. Yasuo Iwakura (岩倉康男, Iwakura Yasuo) Voiced by: Ryūsuke Ōbayashi (Japanese); Barry Stigler (English) Lain and Mika's father. Passionate about computers and electronic communication, he works with Masami Eiri at Tachibana General Laboratories. He subtly pushes Lain, his "youngest daughter", towards the Wired and monitors her development until she becomes more and more aware of herself and of her raison d'être. He eventually leaves Lain, telling her that although he did not enjoy playing house, he genuinely loved and cared for her as a real father would. Despite Yasuo's eagerness to lure Lain into the Wired, he warns her not to get overly involved in it or to confuse it with the real world. Miho Iwakura (岩倉美穂, Iwakura Miho) Voiced by: Rei Igarashi (Japanese); Dari Lallou Mackenzie (English) Lain and Mika's mother. Although she dotes on her husband, she is indifferent towards both her kids. She does not show much emotion compared to her husband, but she does share at least one trait; just like her husband, she ends up leaving Lain. She is a computer scientist. Mika Iwakura (岩倉美香, Iwakura Mika) Voiced by: Ayako Kawasumi (Japanese); Patricia Ja Lee (English) Lain's older sister, an apathetic sixteen-year-old high school student. She seems to enjoy mocking Lain's behavior and interests. Mika is considered by Anime Revolution to be the only normal member of Lain's family: she sees her boyfriend in love hotels, is on a diet, and shops in Shibuya regularly. At a certain point in the series, she becomes heavily traumatized by violent and relentless hallucinations; while Lain begins freely delving into the Wired. Mika is taken there by her proximity to Lain, and she gets stuck between the real world and the Wired. Taro (タロウ, Tarō) Voiced by: Keito Takimoto (Japanese); Brianne Siddall (English) A young boy of about Lain's age. He occasionally works for the Knights to bring forth "the one truth". De
Read more →
Dave's Redistricting

Dave's Redistricting App (DRA) is an online web app originally created by Dave Bradlee that allows anyone to simulate redistricting a U.S. state's congressional and legislative districts. == Purpose == According to Bradlee, the software was designed to "put power in people's hands," and so that they "can see how the process works, so it's a little less mysterious than it was 10 years ago." Bradlee has noticed that many citizens are taking this process seriously and using his app to create legitimate redistricting maps that could be put in place. Some websites have called Bradlee the pioneer and cause of the rise of do-it-yourself redistricting. States such as Montana in 2021 allowed the general population to use it to submit redistricting proposals following the 2020 United States Census. Dave's Redistricting has frequently been mentioned as a resource that can be used to combat gerrymandering, given that the public has free access to it. Political science firms such as FiveThirtyEight have used the website to draw examples of gerrymandered districts, including on their famous Atlas of Redistricting. Dave Bradlee built the first generation of DRA. DRA 2020 is built by a small team of volunteers—Dave Bradlee, Terry Crowley, Alec Ramsay, and David Rinn—all with a shared passion for technology & democracy and all Microsoft veterans. Their mission is to empower civic organizations and citizen activists to advocate for fair congressional and legislative districts and increased transparency in the redistricting process. == Functions == Users can redraw the congressional and state legislative districts for all 50 states, the District of Columbia, and Puerto Rico using a variety of census and election datasets including Cook PVI. Maps can be optimized for different criteria. DRA 2020 added several major features to the first generation app: Sharing & collaborative editing of maps, like Google Docs Multiple statewide elections for all 50 states including the ability to import your own data Comprehensive analytics for evaluating and comparing maps Custom overlays, and Block-level editing DRA remains free to use. == Versions == 2.2: This uses Bing Maps, an outdated software that projects the districts of a single state onto a map of the United States. 2.5: After Bing Maps announced that it would no longer be updating for the foreseen future, the U.S. Map feature was removed. DRA 2020: At the end of 2018, a beta version of 2020 was released. This version that did not require Microsoft Silverlight and could be used in any web browser. DRA 2020 has been under continuous development since and is built using React (JavaScript library), Mapbox, OpenStreetMap, TypeScript, Node.js, Amazon Web Services, as well as many open source components, tools, and icons.
Read more →
Sora (text-to-video model)

Sora was a text-to-video model and social media app developed by OpenAI. Using artificial intelligence, the model generated short video clips based on prompts, and could also extend existing short videos. In February 2024, OpenAI previewed examples of its output to the public, with the first generation of Sora released publicly for ChatGPT Plus and ChatGPT Pro users in the United States and Canada in December 2024. The second generation of Sora was released to select users in the US and Canada at the end of September 2025. Sora 2 integrated social media features into the app. The app was shut down on April 26, 2026 and the application programming interface (API) is planned to be discontinued on September 24, 2026, marking the end of the Sora AI brand as a whole. By default, the generator used copyrighted material in its videos, unless copyright holders actively opt out of having their content included. Videos contained a visible, moving digital watermark to prevent misuse, but a week after Sora 2's release, third-party programs became available which could remove the watermark. == Background == Several other models capable of generating video from text had been created prior to Sora, including Meta's Make‑A‑Video, Runway's Gen‑2 and Google Veo. OpenAI, the company behind Sora, had released DALL·E 3, the third of its DALL-E text-to-image models, in September 2023. == History == === Initial release === The team that developed Sora named it after the Japanese word for 'sky' to signify its "limitless creative potential". On February 15, 2024, OpenAI first previewed Sora by releasing multiple clips of high-definition videos that it had created, including an SUV driving down a mountain road, an animation of a "short fluffy monster" next to a candle, two people walking through Tokyo in the snow, and fake historical footage of the California gold rush. OpenAI stated that it was able to generate videos as long as one minute. The company then shared a technical report that highlighted the methods used to train the model. OpenAI CEO Sam Altman also posted a series of tweets responding to Twitter users' prompts with Sora-generated videos of the prompts. As of December 9, 2024, OpenAI had gradually made Sora available to the public for ChatGPT Pro and ChatGPT Plus users in the U.S. and Canada. Prior to this, the company had provided limited access to a small "red team", including experts in misinformation and bias, to perform adversarial testing on the model. The company also shared Sora with a small group of creative professionals, including video makers and artists, to seek feedback on its usefulness in creative fields. In February 2025, OpenAI announced plans to integrate Sora into ChatGPT by letting users generate Sora videos from the chatbot. === Sora 2 === Sora 2 was unveiled on September 30, 2025, with an iOS app at the same time, as well as an Android app two months later. All videos generated by the model feature a visible, moving watermark to prevent misuse of the tool. The previous version of Sora also added a safety watermark to allow viewers to distinguish between real and fictional content. On October 7, 404 Media reported that third-party programs that could remove the watermark from Sora 2 videos had become prevalent. Many outlets, such as Wired magazine, have noted that the Sora 2 app is overtly similar to TikTok in style and features. === Discontinuation === On March 24, 2026, OpenAI announced on X that it was discontinuing Sora in both the mobile app and the API. The Sora app was shut down on April 26, 2026, while the API is planned to be shut down on September 24, 2026. OpenAI's partnership with Disney, which included a licensing agreement allowing Disney characters to be used within Sora, was also coming to an end. The decision prompted British technology news website The Register to label OpenAI a "product-killer", following in the footsteps of other technology companies such as Google, Amazon Web Services, Broadcom, Cloud Software Group, and Netscape. OpenAI did not provide a specific reason for discontinuing Sora in its shutdown notice. The reports that emerged regarding this discontinuity linked the decision to computation shortages, cost pressures, and a broader shift toward core enterprise products. Following its public launch, Sora's worldwide users peaked at around a million before declining to fewer than 500,000, while the service cost an estimated $1 million per day to operate due to the computational demands of video generation. == Legal regulation == In November 2024, an API key for Sora access was leaked by a group of testers on Hugging Face who posted a manifesto stating that they were protesting that Sora was used for "art washing". OpenAI revoked all access three hours after the leak was made public and stated that "hundreds of artists" have shaped the development and that "participation is voluntary". At the time of its launch, Sora 2 allowed copyrighted content by default unless copyright holders contacted OpenAI to restrict the generation of their content on the platform. On October 3, 2025, OpenAI stated that a future update to Sora 2 would give copyright holders "more granular control" over the generation of copyrighted content, but the company did not state whether existing content would be removed. On October 6, the chairman of the MPA criticized OpenAI's approach to copyright with Sora 2. On December 11, 2025, the Walt Disney Company announced that it would invest $1 billion in OpenAI to allow users to generate more than 200 of its copyrighted characters on Sora 2. These characters include those from Disney Animation, Pixar, Marvel Studios, and Star Wars. == Capabilities and limitations == The technology behind Sora is an adaptation of the technology behind DALL-E 3. According to OpenAI, Sora is a diffusion transformer, a denoising latent diffusion model with one transformer as its denoiser. A video is generated in latent space by denoising 3D "patches", then transformed to standard space by a video decompressor. Recaptioning is employed to augment training data by using a video-to-text model to create detailed captions for videos. OpenAI trained the model using publicly available videos as well as copyrighted videos licensed for the purpose, but did not reveal the number or the exact source of the videos. Upon its release, OpenAI acknowledged some of Sora's shortcomings, including its limited capacity to simulate complex physics, to understand causality and to differentiate left from right. OpenAI also stated that, in adherence to the company's existing safety practices, Sora will restrict text prompts for sexual, violent, hateful or celebrity imagery, as well as content featuring existing intellectual property. Sora researcher Tim Brooks stated that the model learned how to create 3D graphics from its dataset alone, while fellow Sora researcher Bill Peebles said that the model automatically created different video angles without being prompted. According to OpenAI, Sora-generated videos are also tagged with C2PA metadata to indicate that they are AI-processed. === Comparison with other models === The Artificial Analysis have placed Sora 2 pro lower than other text-to-video AI generators in the market on its leaderboard. Other models, such as Seedance 2.0 from ByteDance, Runaway 4.5 from Runaway, and Kling 3.0 from KlingAI, have ranked higher than Sora 2.0. == Reception == === Positive === In 2024, Will Douglas Heaven of the MIT Technology Review called the demonstration videos "impressive", but noted that they must have been cherry-picked and may not be representative of Sora's typical output. Lisa Lacy of CNET called its example videos "remarkably realistic – except perhaps when a human face appears close up or when sea creatures are swimming". In October 2025, The New York Times remarked that the release of the Sora 2 app in September 2025 was "jaw-dropping (for better and worse)" though also remarked that the app was a "social network in disguise" and "the type of product that companies like Meta and X have sought to build: a way to bring A.I. to the masses that people can share." The article expressed concern regarding the product's potential impact on society and its potential use to promote misinformation, disinformation, and scams. A 2025 study in Science Advances found that generative AI tools can lower barriers to entry in creative work. It enables users with diverse skill sets, including people with less formal artistic training and technical skills, to act on their creative and imaginative ideas. The lower barrier to entry allows such users previously locked out of the creative industry to produce content and easily act on their creative ideas. === Negative === Some internet users and online content creators, such as Hank Green, called the mobile app "SlopTok," a reference to both the mobile app TikTok and the term AI slop. Filmmaker Tyler Perry announced he would be putting a planned
Read more →
Data processing unit

A data processing unit (DPU) is a programmable computer processor that tightly integrates a general-purpose CPU with network interface hardware. They are also occasionally called "IPUs" (infrastructure processing unit) or "SmartNICs". They can be used in place of traditional NICs to relieve the main CPU of complex networking responsibilities and other "infrastructural" duties; although their features vary, they may be used to perform encryption/decryption, serve as a firewall, handle TCP/IP, process HTTP requests, or even function as a hypervisor or storage controller. These devices can be attractive to cloud computing providers whose servers might otherwise spend a significant amount of CPU time on these tasks, cutting into the cycles they can provide to guests. They see use in other kinds of data center environments as well due to their improved power consumption efficiency for routine networking tasks compared to general-purpose CPUs.
Read more →
Conference on Artificial General Intelligence

The Conference on Artificial General Intelligence (AGI) is a meeting of researchers in the field of artificial general intelligence (AGI) organized by the AGI Society steered by Marcus Hutter and Ben Goertzel. It has been held annually since 2008. The conference was initiated by the 2006 Bethesda Artificial General Intelligence Workshop and has since been hosted at various international venues. == Locations and history == AGI-2026 San Francisco State University, California, USA AGI-2025 Reykjavík University, Reykjavík, Iceland AGI-2024 University of Washington, Seattle, Washington, USA AGI-2023 KTH Royal Institute of Technology, Stockholm, Sweden AGI-2022 The Crocodile, Seattle, Washington, USA AGI-2021 Computer History Museum, Mountain View, California, USA AGI-2020 Virtual Conference AGI-2019 Sheraton Shenzhen Futian, Shenzhen, China AGI-2018 Czech Technical University, Prague, Czech Republic AGI-2017 ibis Melbourne, Melbourne, Australia AGI-2016 The New School, New York, New York, USA AGI-2015 Berlin-Brandenburg Academy of Sciences and Humanities, Berlin, Germany AGI-2014 Université Laval, Quebec City, Canada (sponsored by the Cognitive Science Society and the AAAI) AGI-2013 Peking University, Beijing, China (sponsored by the Cognitive Science Society and the AAAI) AGI-2012 University of Oxford, Oxford, United Kingdom (sponsored by the Future of Humanity Institute and Ray Kurzweil) AGI-2011 Google Headquarters, Mountain View, California, USA (sponsored by Google, AAAI, and Ray Kurzweil) AGI-2010 University of Lugano, Lugano, Switzerland (In Memoriam Ray Solomonoff and sponsored by AAAI and Ray Kurzweil) AGI-2009 Crowne Plaza Crystal City, Arlington, Virginia, USA (sponsored by AAAI and Ray Kurzweil) AGI-2008 University of Memphis, Tennessee, USA (sponsored by AAAI) == Notable speakers == The conference has attracted many speakers over the years including Turing Award winners Yoshua Bengio and Richard S. Sutton as well as Ben Goertzel, Marcus Hutter, Jürgen Schmidhuber, Gary Marcus, John E. Laird, Peter Norvig, Joscha Bach, François Chollet, John L. Pollock, Bill Hibbard, Hugo de Garis, Stan Franklin, Steve Omohundro, Randal A. Koene, Ernst Dickmanns, Margaret Boden, David Hanson, Roman Yampolskly, Selmer Bringsjord, Kristinn R. Thórisson and Nick Bostrom.
Read more →
Tapingo

Tapingo was an American mobile commerce application that offers advance ordering for pickup and food delivery services for college campuses. The company was acquired by Grubhub in September 2018 for approximately $150 million. Following the acquisition, Tapingo’s campus-ordering functionality was integrated into the Grubhub app (Grubhub Campus Dining) and the Tapingo service was discontinued during 2019. Tapingo is differentiated from other on-demand delivery/logistics companies, such as Waiter.com, Postmates, or DoorDash, by focusing its efforts on serving the college market. Through Tapingo, users can browse menus, place orders, pay for the meal and schedule the pickup or have it delivered. On certain campuses, students are able to use their university's meal dollars to pay for food. In the spring of 2012, Tapingo first launched its services on five campuses (Santa Clara University, Loyola Marymount University, Biola University, the University of Maine, and California Lutheran University), and has since expanded to more than 200 college campuses across the U.S. and Canada, serving 100 markets. To date, Tapingo has received venture funding from Carmel Ventures, Khosla Ventures, Kinzon Capital, DCM Ventures and Qualcomm Ventures. In fall 2015, Tapingo announced expansion plans through major partnership deals with national brands like Chipotle Mexican Grill and 7-Eleven, regional restaurants such as Taco Bueno, and global foodservice provider Aramark.
Read more →
With Folded Hands ...

"With Folded Hands ..." is a 1947 science fiction novelette by American writer Jack Williamson (1908–2006). In writing it, Williamson was influenced by the aftermath of World War II, the atomic bombings of Hiroshima and Nagasaki, and his concern that "some of the technological creations we had developed with the best intentions might have disastrous consequences in the long run." The novelette first appeared in the July 1947 issue of Astounding Science Fiction and was later included in The Science Fiction Hall of Fame, Volume Two (1973) after being voted one of the best novellas up to 1965. In 1950, it was the first of several Astounding stories adapted for NBC's radio series Dimension X. == Rewrite and sequel == The 1947 publication was followed by a novel-length rewrite, with a different setting and inventor. At the behest of Astounding editor-in-chief John W. Campbell, a new ending had the robots defeated by means of what Williamson and Campbell would later christen "psionics". This novel was serialized, also in Astounding (March, April, May 1948), as ... And Searching Mind, and finally published in hardback book form as The Humanoids (1949). Much later, in 1980, Williamson followed with another sequel, The Humanoid Touch. == Plot summary == Underhill, a seller of "Mechanicals" (unthinking robots that perform menial tasks) in the small town of Two Rivers, is startled to find a competitor's store on his way home. The competitors are not humans but are small black robots who appear more advanced than anything Underhill has encountered before. They describe themselves as "humanoids". Disturbed at his encounter, Underhill rushes home to discover that his wife has taken in a new lodger, a mysterious old man named Sledge. In the course of the next day, the new Mechanicals have appeared everywhere in town. They state that they only follow the Prime Directive: "to serve and obey and guard men from harm". Offering their services free of charge, they replace humans as police officers, bank tellers, and more, and eventually drive Underhill out of business. Despite the humanoids' benign appearance and mission, Underhill soon realizes that, in the name of their Prime Directive, the mechanicals have essentially taken over every aspect of human life. No humans may engage in any behavior that might endanger them, and every human action is carefully scrutinized. Suicide is prohibited. Humans who resist the Prime Directive are taken away and lobotomized, so that they may live happily under the direction of the humanoids. Underhill learns that his lodger Sledge is the creator of the humanoids and is on the run from them. Sledge explains that 60 years earlier he had discovered the force of "rhodomagnetics" on the planet Wing IV and that his discovery resulted in a war that destroyed his planet. In his grief, Sledge designed the humanoids to help humanity and be invulnerable to human exploitation. However, he eventually realized that they had instead taken control of humanity, in the name of their Prime Directive, to make humans happy. The humanoids are spreading out from Wing IV to every human-occupied planet to implement their Prime Directive. Sledge and Underhill attempt to stop the humanoids by aiming a rhodomagnetic beam at Wing IV, but fail. The humanoids take Sledge away for surgery. He returns with no memory of his prior life, stating that he is now happy under the humanoids' care. Underhill is driven home by the humanoids, sitting "with folded hands," as there is nothing left to do. == Origins == In a 1991 interview, Williamson revealed how the story construction reflected events of his childhood in addition to technological extrapolations: I wrote "With Folded Hands" immediately after World War II, when the shadow of the atomic bomb had just fallen over SF and was just beginning to haunt the imaginations of people in the US. The story grows out of that general feeling that some of the technological creations we had developed with the best intentions might have disastrous consequences in the long run (that idea, of course, still seems relevant today). The notion I was consciously working on specifically came out of a fragment of a story I had worked on for a while about an astronaut in space who is accompanied by a robot obviously superior to him physically—i.e., the robot wasn't hurt by gravity, extremes of temperature, radiation, or whatever. Just looking at the fragment gave me the sense of how inferior humanity is in many ways to mechanical creations. That basic recognition was the essence of the story, and as I wrote it up in my notes the theme was that the perfect machine would prove to be perfectly destructive... It was only when I looked back at the story much later on that I was able to realize that the emotional reach of the story undoubtedly derived from my own early childhood, when people were attempting to protect me from all those hazardous things a kid is going to encounter in the isolated frontier setting I grew up in. As a result, I felt frustrated and over protected by people whom I couldn't hate because I loved them. A sort of psychological trap. Specifically, the first three years of my life were spent on a ranch at the top of the Sierra Madre Mountains on the headwaters of the Yaqui River in Sonora, Mexico. ... [My mother] was terrified by this environment. My father built a crib that became a psychological prison for me, particularly because my mother apparently kept me in it too long, when I needed to get out and crawl on the floor. ... In retrospect, I'm certain I projected my fears and suspicions of this kind of conditioning, and these projections became the governing emotional principle of "With Folded Hands" and The Humanoids. == Reception == In 2024, Robert Silverberg wrote an essay in which he asserted that "With Folded Hands..." is "probably the best story ever written about robots" and suggested that Elon Musk's Optimus Generation 2 is the realization of the "humanoids" along with their worst drawbacks.
Read more →
List of artificial intelligence artists

Many notable artificial intelligence artists have created a wide variety of artificial intelligence art from the 1960s to today. These include: == 20th century == Harold Cohen, active from 1960s to 2010s. Cohen's work is primarily with AARON, a series of computer programs that autonomously create original images. Eric Millikin, active from 1980s to present. Millikin's work includes AI-generated virtual reality, video art, poetry, music, and performance art, on topics such as animal rights, climate change, anti-racism, witchcraft, and the occult. Karl Sims, active from 1980s to present. Sims is best known for using particle systems and artificial life in computer animation. == 21st century == Refik Anadol, active from 2010s to present. Anadol's work includes video installations based on generative algorithms with artificial intelligence. Sougwen Chung, active from 2010s to present. Chung's work includes performances with a robotic arm that uses AI to attempt to draw in a manner similar to Chung. Stephanie Dinkins, active from 2010s to present. Dinkins' work includes recordings of conversations with an artificially intelligent robot that resembles a black woman, discussing topics such as race and the nature of being. Jake Elwes, active from 2010s to present. Their practice is the exploration of artificial intelligence, queer theory and technical biases. Libby Heaney, active from 2010s to present. Heaney's practice includes work with chatbots. Mario Klingemann, active from 2010s to present. Klingemann's works examine creativity, culture, and perception through machine learning and artificial intelligence. Mauro Martino, active from 2010s to present. Martino's work includes design, data visualization and infographics. Trevor Paglen, active from 2000s to present. Paglen's practice includes work in photography and geography, on topics like mass surveillance and data collection. Anna Ridler, active from 2010s to present. Ridler works with collections of information, including self-generated data sets, often working with floral photography.
Read more →