AI Chat Bots Roleplay

AI Chat Bots Roleplay — independent reviews, comparisons, pricing and step-by-step guides on Aizhi.

Automated Mathematician

The Automated Mathematician (AM) is one of the earliest successful discovery systems. It was created by Douglas Lenat in Lisp, and in 1977 led to Lenat being awarded the IJCAI Computers and Thought Award. AM worked by generating and modifying short Lisp programs which were then interpreted as defining various mathematical concepts; for example, a program that tested equality between the length of two lists was considered to represent the concept of numerical equality, while a program that produced a list whose length was the product of the lengths of two other lists was interpreted as representing the concept of multiplication. The system had elaborate heuristics for choosing which programs to extend and modify, based on the experiences of working mathematicians in solving mathematical problems. == Controversy == Lenat claimed that the system was composed of hundreds of data structures called "concepts", together with hundreds of "heuristic rules" and a simple flow of control: "AM repeatedly selects the top task from the agenda and tries to carry it out. This is the whole control structure!" Yet the heuristic rules were not always represented as separate data structures; some had to be intertwined with the control flow logic. Some rules had preconditions that depended on the history, or otherwise could not be represented in the framework of the explicit rules. What's more, the published versions of the rules often involve vague terms that are not defined further, such as "If two expressions are structurally similar, ..." (Rule 218) or "... replace the value obtained by some other (very similar) value..." (Rule 129). Another source of information is the user, via Rule 2: "If the user has recently referred to X, then boost the priority of any tasks involving X." Thus, it appears quite possible that much of the real discovery work is buried in unexplained procedures. Lenat claimed that the system had rediscovered both Goldbach's conjecture and the fundamental theorem of arithmetic. Later critics accused Lenat of over-interpreting the output of AM. In his paper Why AM and Eurisko appear to work, Lenat conceded that any system that generated enough short Lisp programs would generate ones that could be interpreted by an external observer as representing equally sophisticated mathematical concepts. However, he argued that this property was in itself interesting—and that a promising direction for further research would be to look for other languages in which short random strings were likely to be useful. == Successor == This intuition was the basis of AM's successor Eurisko, which attempted to generalize the search for mathematical concepts to the search for useful heuristics.
Read more →
Group key

In cryptography, a group key is a cryptographic key that is shared between a group of users. Typically, group keys are distributed by sending them to individual users, either physically, or encrypted individually for each user using either that user's pre-distributed private key. A common use of group keys is to allow a group of users to decrypt a broadcast message that is intended for that entire group of users, and no one else. For example, in the Second World War, group keys (known as "iodoforms", a term invented by a classically educated non-chemist, and nothing to do with the chemical of the same name) were sent to groups of agents by the Special Operations Executive. These group keys allowed all the agents in a particular group to receive a single coded message. In present-day applications, group keys are commonly used in conditional access systems, where the key is the common key used to decrypt the broadcast signal, and the group in question is the group of all paying subscribers. In this case, the group key is typically distributed to the subscribers' receivers using a combination of a physically distributed secure cryptoprocessor in the form of a smartcard and encrypted over-the-air messages.
Read more →
Data governance

Data governance is a term used on both a macro and a micro level. The former is a political concept and forms part of international relations and Internet governance; the latter is a data management concept and forms part of corporate/organizational data governance. Data governance involves delegating authority over data and exercising that authority through decision-making processes. It plays a role in enhancing the value of data assets. == Macro level == Data governance at the macro level involves regulating cross-border data flows among countries, which is more precisely termed international data governance. This field was first formed in the early 2000s, and consists of "norms, principles and rules governing various types of data." There have been several international groups established by research organizations that aim to grant access to their data. These groups that enable an exchange of data are, as a result, exposed to domestic and international legal interpretations that ultimately decide how data is used. However, as of 2023, there are no international laws or agreements specifically focused on data protection. == Data governance (Data Management) == Data governance is the set of principles, policies, and processes that guide the effective and responsible use of data within an organization. It creates a framework for decision making, accountability, and oversight across the data lifecycle, from creation and storage to sharing and disposal. Data governance is closely linked with data management, which provides the practical methods to carry out governance objectives. These methods include data quality assurance, metadata management, master data management, security controls, and compliance monitoring. Together, governance and management aim to maximize the value of data as a strategic asset, reduce risks from misuse or inaccuracy, and ensure compliance with regulatory, ethical, and business requirements. The importance of this discipline has grown with the rise of big data, cloud computing, and artificial intelligence, where consistent standards and stewardship are essential for privacy protection, interoperability, and informed decision making. == Data governance drivers == While data governance initiatives can be driven by a desire to improve data quality, they are often driven by C-level leaders responding to external regulations. In a recent report conducted by the CIO WaterCooler community, 54% stated the key driver was efficiencies in processes; 39% - regulatory requirements; and only 7% customer service. Examples of these regulations include Sarbanes–Oxley Act, Basel I, Basel II, HIPAA, GDPR, cGMP, and a number of data privacy regulations. To achieve compliance with these regulations, business processes and controls require formal management processes to govern the data subject to these regulations. Successful programs identify drivers that are meaningful to both supervisory and executive leadership. Common themes among the external regulations center on the need to manage risk. The risks can be financial misstatement, inadvertent release of sensitive data, or poor data quality for key decisions. Methods to manage these risks vary from industry to industry. Examples of commonly referenced best practices and guidelines include COBIT, ISO/IEC 38500, and others. The proliferation of regulations and standards creates challenges for data governance professionals, particularly when multiple regulations overlap the data being managed. Organizations often launch data governance initiatives to address these challenges. == Data governance initiatives (Dimensions) == Data governance initiatives improve the quality of data by assigning a team responsible for data's accuracy, completeness, consistency, timeliness, validity, and uniqueness. This team usually consists of executive leadership, project management, line-of-business managers, and data stewards. The team usually employs a methodology for tracking and improving enterprise data, such as Six Sigma, and tools for data mapping, profiling, cleansing, and monitoring data. Data governance initiatives may be aimed at achieving a number of objectives including offering better visibility to internal and external customers (such as supply chain management), compliance with regulatory law, improving operations after rapid company growth or corporate mergers, or to aid the efficiency of enterprise knowledge workers by reducing confusion and error and increasing their scope of knowledge. Many data governance initiatives are also inspired by past attempts to fix information quality at the departmental level, which can lead to incongruent and redundant data quality processes. Most large companies have many applications and databases that can not easily share information. Therefore, knowledge workers within large organizations may not have access to the data they need to best do their jobs. When they do have access to the data, the data quality may be poor. By setting up a data governance practice or corporate data authority (individual or area responsible for determining how to proceed, in the best interest of the business, when a data issue arises), these problems can be mitigated. == Implementation == Implementation of a data governance initiative may vary in scope as well as origin. Sometimes, an executive mandate will arise to initiate an enterprise-wide effort. Sometimes the mandate will be to create a pilot project or projects, limited in scope and objectives, aimed at either resolving existing issues or demonstrating value. Sometimes, an initiative originates from lower down in the organization's hierarchy and will be deployed in a limited scope to demonstrate value to potential sponsors higher up in the organization. The initial scope of an implementation can vary greatly as well, from review of a one-off IT system to a cross-organization initiative. == Data governance tools == Leaders of successful data governance programs declared at the Data Governance Conference in Orlando, FL, in December 2006, that data governance is about 80 to 95 percent communication. That stated, it is a given that many of the objectives of a data governance program must be accomplished with appropriate tools. Many vendors are now positioning their products as data governance tools. Due to the different focus areas of various data governance initiatives, a given tool may or may not be appropriate. Additionally, many tools that are not marketed as governance tools address governance needs and demands.
Read more →
Kurzsignale

The Short Signal Code, also known as the Short Signal Book (German: Kurzsignalbuch), was a short code system used by the Kriegsmarine (German Navy) during World War II to minimize the transmission duration of messages. == Description == The transmission of radio messages had the potential risks of revealing the submarine's presence and direction; if decoded the content was also revealed. Submarines need to provide information, mostly in standard form (position of convoy to attack and of submarine, weather information), to their bases. Initially Morse code transmissions could be used. To inhibit detection, the duration of messages needed to be minimised; for this, Kurzsignale short-coding was used. To prevent interception, messages needed to be encrypted by the Enigma machine. To shorten transmission even further, the message could be sent by a fast machine instead of a human radio operator. For example, the Kurier system – not implemented in time – decreased the time to send a Morse dot from around 50 milliseconds for a human to 1 millisecond. == Short Signal book == The Kurzsignale code was intended to shorten transmission time to below the time required to get a directional fix. It was not primarily intended to hide signal contents; protection was intended to be achieved by encoding with the Enigma machine. A copy of the Kurzsignale code book was captured from German submarine U-110 on 9 May 1941. In August 1941, Dönitz began addressing U-boats by the names of their commanders, instead of boat numbers. The method of defining U-boat meeting points in the Short Signal Book was regarded as compromised, so a method was defined by B-Dienst cryptanalysts to disguise their positions on the Kriegsmarine German Naval Grid System (German:Gradnetzmeldeverfahren) was introduced and used until the end of the war == Radio direction finding == Aware of the danger presented by radio direction finding (RDF), the Kriegsmarine developed various systems to speed up broadcast. The Kurzsignale code system condensed messages into short codes consisting of short sequences for common terms such as "convoy location" so that additional descriptions would not be needed in the message. The resulting Kurzsignal was then encoded with the Enigma machine and subsequently transmitted as rapidly as possible, typically taking about 20 seconds. Typical length of an information or weather signal was about 25 characters. Conventional RDF needed about a minute to fix the bearing of a radio signal, and the Kurzsignale protected against this. However, the huff-duff system which was in use by the Allies could cope with these short transmissions. The fully automated burst transmission Kurier system, in testing from August 1944, could send a Kurzsignal in not more than 460 milliseconds; this was short enough to prevent location even by huff-duff and, if deployed, would have been a serious setback for Allied anti-submarine and code-breaking activities. By late 1944 the Kurier program was a top priority, but the war ended before the system was operational. == Short Weather cipher == A similar coding system was used for weather reports from U-boats, the Wetterkurzschlüssel (Short Weather Cipher). Code books were captured from U-559 on 30 October 1942.
Read more →
Manual override

A manual override (MO) or manual analog override (MAO) is a mechanism where control is taken from an automated system and given to the user. For example, a manual override in photography refers to the ability for the human photographer to turn off the automatic aperture sizing, automatic focusing, or any other automated system on the camera. Some manual overrides can be used to veto an automated system's judgment when the system is in error. An example of this is a printer's ink level detection: in one case, a researcher found that when he overrode the system, up to 38% more pages could be printed at good quality by the printer than the automated system would have allowed. Automated systems are becoming increasingly common and integrated into everyday objects such as automobiles and domestic appliances. This development of ubiquitous computing raises general issues of policy and law about the need for manual overrides for matters of great importance such as life-threatening situations and major economic decisions. The loyalty of such autonomous devices then becomes an issue. If they follow rules installed by the manufacturer or required by law and refuse to cede control in some situations then the owners of the devices may feel disempowered, alienated and lacking true ownership. == Major incidents == China Airlines Flight 140 crashed, causing many deaths, due to a misunderstanding about the manual overrides for the autopilot. The Take-Off/Go Around system had been activated to abort a landing. It was programmed to ignore manual controls in this situation but the human pilots tried to continue the landing. The conflicting control signals from the pilots and autopilot then resulted in the aircraft stalling and crashing. The autopilot for this aircraft type was then reprogrammed so that it would never ignore a manual override.
Read more →
Feistel cipher

In cryptography, a Feistel cipher (also known as Luby–Rackoff block cipher) is a symmetric structure used in the construction of block ciphers, named after the German-born physicist and cryptographer Horst Feistel, who did pioneering research while working for IBM; it is also commonly known as a Feistel network. A large number of block ciphers use the scheme, including the US Data Encryption Standard, the Soviet/Russian GOST (aka Magma) and the more recent Blowfish and Twofish ciphers. In a Feistel cipher, encryption and decryption are very similar operations, and both consist of iteratively running a function called a "round function" a fixed number of times. == History == Many modern symmetric block ciphers are based on Feistel networks. Feistel networks were first seen commercially in IBM's Lucifer cipher, designed by Horst Feistel and Don Coppersmith in 1973. Feistel networks gained respectability when the U.S. Federal Government adopted the DES (a cipher based on Lucifer, with changes made by the NSA) in 1976. Like other components of the DES, the iterative nature of the Feistel construction makes implementing the cryptosystem in hardware easier (particularly on the hardware available at the time of DES's design). == Design == A Feistel network uses a round function, a function which takes two inputs – a data block and a subkey – and returns one output of the same size as the data block. In each round, the round function is run on half of the data to be encrypted, and its output is XORed with the other half of the data. This is repeated a fixed number of times, and the final output is the encrypted data. An important advantage of Feistel networks compared to other cipher designs such as substitution–permutation networks (SP-networks) is that the entire operation is guaranteed to be invertible (that is, encrypted data can be decrypted), even if the round function is not itself invertible. The round function can be made arbitrarily complicated, since it does not need to be designed to be invertible. Furthermore, the encryption and decryption operations are very similar, even identical in some cases, requiring only a reversal of the key schedule. Therefore, the size of the code or circuitry required to implement such a cipher is nearly halved. Unlike SP-networks, Feistel networks also do not depend on a substitution box that could cause timing side-channels in software implementations. == Theoretical work == The structure and properties of Feistel ciphers have been extensively analyzed by cryptographers. Michael Luby and Charles Rackoff analyzed the Feistel cipher construction and proved that if the round function is a cryptographically secure pseudorandom function, with Ki used as the seed, then 3 rounds are sufficient to make the block cipher a pseudorandom permutation, while 4 rounds are sufficient to make it a "strong" pseudorandom permutation (which means that it remains pseudorandom even to an adversary who gets oracle access to its inverse permutation). Because of this very important result of Luby and Rackoff, Feistel ciphers are sometimes called Luby–Rackoff block ciphers. Further theoretical work has generalized the construction somewhat and given more precise bounds for security. == Construction details == Let F {\displaystyle \mathrm {F} } be the round function and let K 0 , K 1 , … , K n {\displaystyle K_{0},K_{1},\ldots ,K_{n}} be the sub-keys for the rounds 0 , 1 , … , n {\displaystyle 0,1,\ldots ,n} respectively. Then the basic operation is as follows: Split the plaintext block into two equal pieces: ( L 0 {\displaystyle L_{0}} , R 0 {\displaystyle R_{0}} ). For each round i = 0 , 1 , … , n {\displaystyle i=0,1,\dots ,n} , compute L i + 1 = R i , {\displaystyle L_{i+1}=R_{i},} R i + 1 = L i ⊕ F ( R i , K i ) , {\displaystyle R_{i+1}=L_{i}\oplus \mathrm {F} (R_{i},K_{i}),} where ⊕ {\displaystyle \oplus } means XOR. Then the ciphertext is ( R n + 1 , L n + 1 ) {\displaystyle (R_{n+1},L_{n+1})} . Decryption of a ciphertext ( R n + 1 , L n + 1 ) {\displaystyle (R_{n+1},L_{n+1})} is accomplished by computing for i = n , n − 1 , … , 0 {\displaystyle i=n,n-1,\ldots ,0} R i = L i + 1 , {\displaystyle R_{i}=L_{i+1},} L i = R i + 1 ⊕ F ⁡ ( L i + 1 , K i ) . {\displaystyle L_{i}=R_{i+1}\oplus \operatorname {F} (L_{i+1},K_{i}).} Then ( L 0 , R 0 ) {\displaystyle (L_{0},R_{0})} is the plaintext again. The diagram illustrates both encryption and decryption. Note the reversal of the subkey order for decryption; this is the only difference between encryption and decryption. === Unbalanced Feistel cipher === Unbalanced Feistel ciphers use a modified structure where L 0 {\displaystyle L_{0}} and R 0 {\displaystyle R_{0}} are not of equal lengths. The Skipjack cipher is an example of such a cipher. The Texas Instruments digital signature transponder uses a proprietary unbalanced Feistel cipher to perform challenge–response authentication. The Thorp shuffle is an extreme case of an unbalanced Feistel cipher in which one side is a single bit. This has better provable security than a balanced Feistel cipher but requires more rounds. There exists Type-1, Type-2, and Type-3 Feistel networks, where the Feistel function is one fourth the size of the block but operates a varying number of times within one round. === Other uses === The Feistel construction is also used in cryptographic algorithms other than block ciphers. For example, the optimal asymmetric encryption padding (OAEP) scheme uses a simple Feistel network to randomize ciphertexts in certain asymmetric-key encryption schemes. A generalized Feistel algorithm can be used to create strong permutations on small domains of size not a power of two (see format-preserving encryption). === Feistel networks as a design component === Whether the entire cipher is a Feistel cipher or not, Feistel-like networks can be used as a component of a cipher's design. For example, MISTY1 is a Feistel cipher using a three-round Feistel network in its round function, Skipjack is a modified Feistel cipher using a Feistel network in its G permutation, and Threefish (part of Skein) is a non-Feistel block cipher that uses a Feistel-like MIX function. == List of Feistel ciphers == Feistel or modified Feistel: Generalised Feistel: CAST-256 CLEFIA MacGuffin RC2 RC6 Skipjack SMS4
Read more →
G.9970

G.9970 (also known as G.hnta) is a Recommendation developed by ITU-T that describes the generic transport architecture for home networks and their interfaces to a provider's access network. G.9970 was developed by Study Group 15, Question 1. G.9970 received Consent on December 12, 2008 and was Approved on January 13, 2009. == Relationship with G.hn == G.9970 (G.hnta) and G.9960 (G.hn) are two ITU-T Recommendations that address home networking in a complementary manner. While G.9970 addresses layer 3 (network layer) of the home network architecture, G.9960 addresses layers 1 (physical layer) and 2 (data link layer).
Read more →
Undeniable signature

An undeniable signature is a digital signature scheme which allows the signer to be selective to whom they allow to verify signatures. The scheme adds explicit signature repudiation, preventing a signer later refusing to verify a signature by omission; a situation that would devalue the signature in the eyes of the verifier. It was invented by David Chaum and Hans van Antwerpen in 1989. == Overview == In this scheme, a signer possessing a private key can publish a signature of a message. However, the signature reveals nothing to a recipient/verifier of the message and signature without taking part in either of two interactive protocols: Confirmation protocol, which confirms that a candidate is a valid signature of the message issued by the signer, identified by the public key. Disavowal protocol, which confirms that a candidate is not a valid signature of the message issued by the signer. The motivation for the scheme is to allow the signer to choose to whom signatures are verified. However, that the signer might claim the signature is invalid at any later point, by refusing to take part in verification, would devalue signatures to verifiers. The disavowal protocol distinguishes these cases removing the signer's plausible deniability. It is important that the confirmation and disavowal exchanges are not transferable. They achieve this by having the property of zero-knowledge; both parties can create transcripts of both confirmation and disavowal that are indistinguishable, to a third-party, of correct exchanges. The designated verifier signature scheme improves upon deniable signatures by allowing, for each signature, the interactive portion of the scheme to be offloaded onto another party, a designated verifier, reducing the burden on the signer. == Zero-knowledge protocol == The following protocol was suggested by David Chaum. A group, G, is chosen in which the discrete logarithm problem is intractable, and all operation in the scheme take place in this group. Commonly, this will be the finite cyclic group of order p contained in Z/nZ, with p being a large prime number; this group is equipped with the group operation of integer multiplication modulo n. An arbitrary primitive element (or generator), g, of G is chosen; computed powers of g then combine obeying fixed axioms. Alice generates a key pair, randomly chooses a private key, x, and then derives and publishes the public key, y = gx. === Message signing === Alice signs the message, m, by computing and publishing the signature, z = mx. === Confirmation (i.e., avowal) protocol === Bob wishes to verify the signature, z, of m by Alice under the key, y. Bob picks two random numbers: a and b, and uses them to blind the message, sending to Alice: c = magb. Alice picks a random number, q, uses it to blind, c, and then signing this using her private key, x, sending to Bob: s1 = cgq ands2 = s1x. Note that s1x = (cgq)x = (magb)xgqx = (mx)a(gx)b+q = zayb+q. Bob reveals a and b. Alice verifies that a and b are the correct blind values, then, if so, reveals q. Revealing these blinds makes the exchange zero knowledge. Bob verifies s1 = cgq, proving q has not been chosen dishonestly, and s2 = zayb+q, proving z is valid signature issued by Alice's key. Note that zayb+q = (mx)a(gx)b+q. Alice can cheat at step 2 by attempting to randomly guess s2. === Disavowal protocol === Alice wishes to convince Bob that z is not a valid signature of m under the key, gx; i.e., z ≠ mx. Alice and Bob have agreed an integer, k, which sets the computational burden on Alice and the likelihood that she should succeed by chance. Bob picks random values, s ∈ {0, 1, ..., k} and a, and sends: v1 = msga and v2 = zsya, where exponentiating by a is used to blind the sent values. Note that v2 = zsya = (mx)s(gx)a = v1x. Alice, using her private key, computes v1x and then the quotient, v1xv2−1 = (msga)x(zsgxa)−1 = msxz−s = (mxz−1)s. Thus, v1xv2−1 = 1, unless z ≠ mx. Alice then tests v1xv2−1 for equality against the values: (mxz−1)i for i ∈ {0, 1, …, k}; which are calculated by repeated multiplication of mxz−1 (rather than exponentiating for each i). If the test succeeds, Alice conjectures the relevant i to be s; otherwise, she conjectures random value. Where z = mx, (mxz−1)i = v1xv2−1 = 1 for all i, s is unrecoverable. Alice commits to i: she picks a random r and sends hash(r, i) to Bob. Bob reveals a. Alice confirms that a is the correct blind (i.e., v1 and v2 can be generated using it), then, if so, reveals r. Revealing these blinds makes the exchange zero knowledge. Bob checks hash(r, i) = hash(r, s), proving Alice knows s, hence z ≠ mx. If Alice attempts to cheat at step 3 by guessing s at random, the probability of succeeding is 1/(k + 1). So, if k = 1023 and the protocol is conducted ten times, her chances are 1 to 2100.
Read more →
ReactiveX

ReactiveX (Rx, also known as Reactive Extensions) is a software library originally created by Microsoft that allows imperative programming languages to operate on sequences of data regardless of whether the data is synchronous or asynchronous. It provides a set of sequence operators that operate on each item in the sequence. It is an implementation of reactive programming and provides a blueprint for the tools to be implemented in multiple programming languages. == Overview == ReactiveX is an API for asynchronous programming with observable streams. Asynchronous programming allows programmers to call functions and then have the functions "callback" when they are done, usually by giving the function the address of another function to execute when it is done. Programs designed in this way often avoid the overhead of having many threads constantly starting and stopping. Observable streams (i.e. streams that can be observed) in the context of Reactive Extensions are like event emitters that emit three events: next, error, and complete. An observable emits next events until it either emits an error event or a complete event. However, at that point it will not emit any more events, unless it is subscribed to again. The examples below use the RxJS implementation of Reactive Extensions for the JavaScript programming language. === Motivation === For sequences of data, it combines the advantages of iterators with the flexibility of event-based asynchronous programming. It also works as a simple promise, eliminating the pyramid of doom that results from multiple layers of callbacks. === Observables and observers === ReactiveX is a combination of ideas from the observer and the iterator patterns and from functional programming. An observer subscribes to an observable sequence. The sequence then sends the items to the observer one at a time, usually by calling the provided callback function. The observer handles each one before processing the next one. If many events come in asynchronously, they must be stored in a queue or dropped. In ReactiveX, an observer will never be called with an item out of order or (in a multi-threaded context) called before the callback has returned for the previous item. Asynchronous calls remain asynchronous and may be handled by returning an observable. It is similar to the iterators pattern in that if a fatal error occurs, it notifies the observer separately (by calling a second function). When all the items have been sent, it completes (and notifies the observer by calling a third function). The Reactive Extensions API also borrows many of its operators from iterator operators in other programming languages. Reactive Extensions is different from functional reactive programming as the Introduction to Reactive Extensions explains: It is sometimes called "functional reactive programming" but this is a misnomer. ReactiveX may be functional, and it may be reactive, but "functional reactive programming" is a different animal. One main point of difference is that functional reactive programming operates on values that change continuously over time, while ReactiveX operates on discrete values that are emitted over time. (See Conal Elliott's work for more-precise information on functional reactive programming.) === Reactive operators === An operator is a function that takes one observable (the source) as its first argument and returns another observable (the destination, or outer observable). Then for every item that the source observable emits, it will apply a function to that item, and then emit it on the destination Observable. It can even emit another Observable on the destination observable. This is called an inner observable. An operator that emits inner observables can be followed by another operator that in some way combines the items emitted by all the inner observables and emits the item on its outer observable. Examples include: switchAll – subscribes to each new inner observable as soon as it is emitted and unsubscribes from the previous one. mergeAll – subscribes to all inner observables as they are emitted and outputs their values in whatever order it receives them. concatAll – subscribes to each inner observable in order and waits for it to complete before subscribing to the next observable. Operators can be chained together to create complex data flows that filter events based on certain criteria. Multiple operators can be applied to the same observable. Some of the operators that can be used in Reactive Extensions may be familiar to programmers who use functional programming language, such as map, reduce, group, and zip. There are many other operators available in Reactive Extensions, though the operators available in a particular implementation for a programming language may vary. ==== Reactive operator examples ==== Here is an example of using the map and reduce operators. We create an observable from a list of numbers. The map operator will then multiply each number by two and return an observable. The reduce operator will then sum up all the numbers provided to it (the value of 0 is the starting point). Calling subscribe will register an observer that will observe the values from the observable produced by the chain of operators. With the subscribe method, we are able to pass in an error-handling function, called whenever an error is emitted in the observable, and a completion function when the observable has finished emitting items. ==== Usage in stream-oriented programming ==== Certain RxJS primitives such as BehaviorSubject make it possible to create pure stateful streams to track application state of arbitrary complexity in simple terms. The button below will feed an event to the stream, which in turn will re-emit the next natural number every time, back into the tag that follows and displays the count of clicks detected. Libraries such as Rimmel.js, designed around RxJS Observables, enable integration between reactive streams and the HTML DOM: == History == Reactive Extensions was created by the Cloud Programmability Team at Microsoft around 2011, as a byproduct of a larger effort called Volta. It was originally intended to provide an abstraction for events across different tiers in an application to support tier splitting in Volta. The project's logo represents an electric eel, which is a reference to Volta. The extensions suffix in the name is a reference to the Parallel Extensions technology which was invented around the same time; the two are considered complementary. The initial implementation of Rx was for .NET Framework and was released on June 21, 2011. Later, the team started the implementation of Rx for other platforms, including JavaScript and C++. The technology was released as open source in late 2012, initially on CodePlex. Later, the code moved to GitHub and has been ported to several other languages, including Go, Java, Kotlin, PHP and Rust.
Read more →
Data exchange

Data exchange is the process of moving data from one information system to another. It often involves transforming data that is native to the source system into a form that is consumable by the target system or to a standardized form that is consumable by any compatible system. In particular, data exchange allows data to be shared between computer programs. Data exchange is similar to data integration except that data may be restructured with possible loss of content. There may be no way to transform a particular collection based on exchange constraints. Conversely, there may be multiple ways to transform the data, in which case one option must be identified in order to achieve compatibility between source and target. There are two main types of data exchange: broadcast and peer-to-peer (a.k.a. unicast). For broadcast, data is transmitted simultaneously to all consumers. Just as a conference call, all participants get the same information from the speaker at the same time. For peer-to-peer, data is sent to a single receiver, defined by a specific address. For example, a letter goes to just one mail box. == Single-domain == In some domains, a multiple source and target schema (proprietary data formats) may exist. An exchange or interchange format is often developed for a single domain, and then necessary routines (mappings) are written to (indirectly) transform/translate each and every source schema to each and every target schema by using the interchange format as an intermediate step. That requires less work than writing and debugging the many routines that would be required to directly translate each source schema directly to each target schema. Examples of these transformative interchange formats include: Standard Interchange Format for geospatial data; Data Interchange Format for spreadsheet data; Open Document Format for spreadsheets, charts, presentations and word processing documents; GPS eXchange Format or Keyhole Markup Language for describing GPS data; GDSII for integrated circuit layout. == Representation == A data exchange (a.k.a. interchange) language defines a domain-independent way to represent data. These languages have evolved from being markup and display-oriented to support the encoding of metadata that describes the structural attributes of the information. Practice has shown that certain types of formal languages are better suited for this task than others, since their specification is driven by a formal process instead of particular software implementation. For example, XML is a markup language that was designed to enable the creation of dialects (the definition of domain-specific sublanguages). However, it does not contain domain-specific dictionaries or fact types. Beneficial to a reliable data exchange is the availability of standard dictionaries-taxonomies and tools libraries such as parsers, schema validators, and transformation tools. === XML === The popularity of XML for data exchange on the World Wide Web has several reasons. First of all, it is closely related to the preexisting standards Standard Generalized Markup Language (SGML) and Hypertext Markup Language (HTML), and as such a parser written to support these two languages can be easily extended to support XML as well. For example, XHTML has been defined as a format that is formal XML, but understood correctly by most (if not all) HTML parsers. === YAML === YAML was designed to be human-readable and authored via a text editor with notion similar to reStructuredText and wiki syntax. YAML 1.2 also includes a shorthand notion that is compatible with JSON, and as such any JSON document is also valid YAML; this however does not hold the other way. === REBOL === REBOL was designed to be human-readable and authored via a text editor. It uses a simple free-form syntax with minimal punctuation and a rich set of data types (such as URL, email, date and time, tuple, string, tag) that respect common standards. It is designed to not need any additional meta-language, being designed in a metacircular fashion which is why the parse dialect used for definitions and transformations of REBOL dialects is also itself a dialect of REBOL. REBOL was used as a source of inspiration for JSON. === Gellish === Gellish English is a formalized subset of natural English (language), which includes a simple grammar and a large, extensible dictionary (taxonomy) that defines the general and domain specific terminology, whereas the concepts are arranged in a hierarchy, which supports inheritance of knowledge and requirements. The dictionary also includes standardized fact types. The terms and relation types together can be used to create and interpret expressions of facts, knowledge, requirements and other information. Gellish can be used in combination with SQL, RDF/XML, OWL and various other meta-languages. The Gellish standard is a combination of ISO 10303-221 (AP221) and ISO 15926. === List === The following describes and compares popular data exchange languages. Columns Schemas – Whether supports representing domain specific data structure definition Flexible – Whether supports extension of the semantic expression capabilities without modifying the schema Semantic verification – Whether supports semantic verification of the correctness of expressions in the language Dictionary – Whether includes a dictionary and a taxonomy (hierarchy) of concepts with inheritance Information model – Whether supports an information model Synonyms and homonyms – Whether supports the use of synonyms and homonyms in expressions Dialecting – Whether is available in multiple natural languages or dialects Web standard – Whether is standardized by a recognized body Transformations – Whether includes a translation to other standards Lightweight – Whether a lightweight version is available Human readable – Whether expressions are understandable without training Compatibility – Which other tools can be used or are required
Read more →
Data hub

A data hub is a center of data exchange that is supported by data science, data engineering, and data warehouse technologies to interact with endpoints such as applications and algorithms. == Features == A data hub differs from a data warehouse in that it is generally unintegrated and often at different grains. It differs from an operational data store because a data hub does not need to be limited to operational data. A data hub differs from a data lake by homogenizing data and possibly serving data in multiple desired formats, rather than simply storing it in one place, and by adding other value to the data such as de-duplication, quality, security, and a standardized set of query services. A data lake tends to store data in one place for availability, and allow/require the consumer to process or add value to the data. Data hubs are ideally the "go-to" place for data within an enterprise, so that many point-to-point connections between callers and data suppliers do not need to be made, and so that the data hub organization can negotiate deliverables and schedules with various data enclave teams, rather than being an organizational free-for-all as different teams try to get new services and features from many other teams.
Read more →
Corporate surveillance

Corporate surveillance describes the practice of businesses monitoring and extracting information from their users, clients, or staff. This information may consist of online browsing history, email correspondence, phone calls, location data, and other private details. Acts of corporate surveillance frequently look to boost results, detect potential security problems, or adjust advertising strategies. These practices have been criticized for violating ethical standards and invading personal privacy. Critics and privacy activists have called for businesses to incorporate rules and transparency surrounding their monitoring methods to ensure they are not misusing their position of authority or breaching regulatory standards. Monitoring can feel intrusive and give the impression that the business does not promote ethical behavior among its personnel. Staff satisfaction, productivity, and staff turnover may all suffer as a result of the invasion of privacy. == Monitoring methods == Employers may be authorized to gather information through keystroke logging and mouse tracking, which involves recording the keys individuals interact with and cursor position on computers. In cases where employment contracts permit it, they may also monitor webcam activity on company-provided computers. Employers may be able to view the emails sent from business accounts and may be able to see the websites visited when using a corporate internet connection. The screenshot capability is another tool that enables companies to see what remote workers are doing. This feature, which can be found in tracking software, takes screenshots throughout the day at predetermined or arbitrary intervals. Additionally, people who don't work in offices are observed. For instance, it has been claimed that Amazon has incorporated tracking technology to monitor warehouse staff and delivery drivers. == Use of collected information == Information collected by corporations can be used for a variety of uses including marketing research, targeting advertising, fraud detection and prevention, ensuring policy adherence, preventing lawsuits, and safeguarding records and company assets. == Privacy concerns == Concerns over corporate privacy have become more important due to companies collection and manipulation of personal data. Since these practices have been recognized there has been a rising concern about both the security and the possible mishandling of the data accumulated. Social Media data collection and monitoring has been one of the most concerned areas regarding corporate surveillance. Recently, many employers on CareerBuilder have checked their potential candidates' social media activities before the hiring process. This approach can be excusable since it is important to be aware of a future employee or applicant's online presence, and how it might affect the company's reputation in the future. This is crucial since employers are often made legally responsible for their worker's digital actions. These data can also be used to enact political gains. The Facebook-Cambridge Analytica data scandal in 2018 revealed that its British branch to have surreptitiously sold American psychological data to the Trump campaign. This information was supposed to be private, but Facebook's inability to protect user information had reportedly not been a top priority of the company at the time. == Laws and regulations == The National Labor and Relations Act (NLRA) safeguards workplace democracy by giving workers in the private sector the basic freedom to demand better working conditions and choice of representation without fear of retaliation. General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR) outlines the broad responsibilities of data controllers and the "processors" that handle personal data on their behalf. They must adopt the necessary security measures in accordance with the risk involved in the data processing operations they carry out.[1] Electronics Communication Privacy Act (ECPA), as amended, provides protection for electronic, oral, and wire communications while they are being created, while they are being sent, and while they are being stored on computers. Email, phone calls, and electronically stored data are covered by the Act. == Sale of customer data == If it is business intelligence, data collected on individuals and groups can be sold to other corporations, so that they can use it for the aforementioned purpose. It can be used for direct marketing purposes, such as targeted advertisements on Google and Yahoo. These ads are tailored to the individual user of the search engine by analyzing their search history and emails (if they use free webmail services). For example, the world's most popular web search engine stores identifying information for each web search. Google stores an IP address and the search phrase used in a database for up to 2 years. Google also scans the content of emails of users of its Gmail webmail service, in order to create targeted advertising based on what people are talking about in their personal email correspondences. Google is, by far, the largest web advertising agency. Their revenue model is based on receiving payments from advertisers for each page-visit resulting from a visitor clicking on a Google AdWords ad, hosted either on a Google service or a third-party website. Millions of sites place Google's advertising banners and links on their websites, in order to share this profit from visitors who click on the ads. Each page containing Google advertisements adds, reads, and modifies cookies on each visitor's computer. These cookies track the user across all of these sites, and gather information about their web surfing habits, keeping track of which sites they visit, and what they do when they are on these sites. This information, along with the information from their email accounts, and search engine histories, is stored by Google to use for building a profile of the user to deliver better-targeted advertising. == Surveillance of workers == In 1993, David Steingard and Dale Fitzgibbons argued that modern management, far from empowering workers, had features of neo-Taylorism, where teamwork perpetuated surveillance and control. They argued that employees had become their own "thought police" and the team gaze was the equivalent of Bentham's panopticon guard tower. A critical evaluation of the Hawthorne Plant experiments has in turn given rise to the notion of a Hawthorne effect, where workers increase their productivity in response to their awareness of being observed or because they are gratified for being chosen to participate in a project. According to the American Management Association and the ePolicy Institute, who undertook a quantitative survey in 2007 about electronic monitoring and surveillance with approximately 300 US companies, "more than one fourth of employers have fired workers for misusing email and nearly one third have fired employees for misusing the Internet." Furthermore, about 30 percent of the companies had also fired employees for usage of "inappropriate or offensive language" and "viewing, downloading, or uploading inappropriate/offensive content." More than 40 percent of the companies monitor email traffic of their workers, and 66 percent of corporations monitor Internet connections. In addition, most companies use software to block websites such as sites with games, social networking, entertainment, shopping, and sports. The American Management Association and the ePolicy Institute also stress that companies track content that is being written about them, for example by monitoring blogs and social media, and scanning all files that are stored in a filesystem. == Government use of corporate surveillance data == The United States government often gains access to corporate databases, either by producing a warrant for it, or by asking. The Department of Homeland Security has openly stated that it uses data collected from consumer credit and direct marketing agencies—such as Google—for augmenting the profiles of individuals that it is monitoring. The US government has gathered information from grocery store discount card programs, which track customers' shopping patterns and store them in databases, in order to look for terrorists by analyzing shoppers' buying patterns. == Corporate surveillance of citizens == According to Dennis Broeders, "Big Brother is joined by big business". He argues that corporations are in any event interested in data on their potential customers and that placing some forms of surveillance in the hands of companies, results in companies owning video surveillance data for stores and public places. The commercial availability of surveillance systems has led to their rapid spread. Therefore it is almost impossible for citizens to maintain their anonymity. When businesses can monitor their customers, such customers run the risk of facing prejudice when applying for housing, loans, jobs, and other economic opportun
Read more →
Normalization (image processing)

In image processing, normalization is a process that changes the range of pixel intensity values, a kind of intensity mapping. Applications include photographs with poor contrast due to glare, for example. A typical case is contrast stretching. In more general fields of data processing, such as digital signal processing, it is referred to as dynamic range expansion. The purpose of dynamic range expansion in the various applications is usually to bring the image, or other type of signal, into a range that is more familiar or normal to the senses, hence the term normalization. Often, the motivation is to achieve consistency in dynamic range for a set of data, signals, or images to avoid mental distraction or fatigue. For example, a newspaper will strive to make all of the images in an issue share a similar range of grayscale. Auto-normalization in image processing software typically normalizes to the full dynamic range of the number system specified in the image file format. == Definition == Normalization transforms an n-dimensional grayscale image I : { X ⊆ R n } → { Min , . . , Max } {\displaystyle I:\{\mathbb {X} \subseteq \mathbb {R} ^{n}\}\rightarrow \{{\text{Min}},..,{\text{Max}}\}} with intensity values in the range ( Min , Max ) {\displaystyle ({\text{Min}},{\text{Max}})} , into a new image I N : { X ⊆ R n } → { newMin , . . , newMax } {\displaystyle I_{N}:\{\mathbb {X} \subseteq \mathbb {R} ^{n}\}\rightarrow \{{\text{newMin}},..,{\text{newMax}}\}} with intensity values in the range ( newMin , newMax ) {\displaystyle ({\text{newMin}},{\text{newMax}})} . The linear normalization of a grayscale digital image is performed according to the formula I N = ( I − Min ) newMax − newMin Max − Min + newMin {\displaystyle I_{N}=(I-{\text{Min}}){\frac {{\text{newMax}}-{\text{newMin}}}{{\text{Max}}-{\text{Min}}}}+{\text{newMin}}} For example, if the intensity range of the image is 50 to 180 and the desired range is 0 to 255 the process entails subtracting 50 from each of pixel intensity, making the range 0 to 130. Then each pixel intensity is multiplied by 255/130, making the range 0 to 255. Normalization might also be non-linear, as the relationship between I {\displaystyle I} and I N {\displaystyle I_{N}} may not be linear. An example of non-linear normalization is when the normalization follows a sigmoid function, in which case the normalized image is computed according to the formula I N = ( newMax − newMin ) 1 1 + e − I − β α + newMin {\displaystyle I_{N}=({\text{newMax}}-{\text{newMin}}){\frac {1}{1+e^{-{\frac {I-\beta }{\alpha }}}}}+{\text{newMin}}} Where α {\displaystyle \alpha } defines the width of the input intensity range, and β {\displaystyle \beta } defines the intensity around which the range is centered. Gamma correction (log/inverse log) is also a common transformation function. === Colorspace === Intensity operations generally operate on a colorspace that maps to the human perception of lightness without intentionally changing the other properties. This can be done, for example, by operating on the L component of the CIELAB color space, or approximately by operating on the Y component of YCbCr. It is also possible to operate on each of the RGB color channels, though the result will not always make sense. == Contrast stretching == This is the most significant and essential technique of spatial-based image enhancement. The basic intent of this contrast enhancement technique is to adjust the local contrast in the image so as to bring out the clear regions or objects in the image. Low-contrast images often result from poor or non-uniform lighting conditions, a limited dynamic range of the imaging sensor, or improper settings of the lens aperture. This operation tries to change the intensity of the pixel in the image, particularly in the input image, to obtain an enhanced image. It is based on the number of techniques, namely local, global, dark and bright levels of contrast. The contrast enhancement is considered as the amount of color or gray differentiation that lies among the different features in an image. The contrast enhancement improves the quality of image by increasing the luminance difference between the foreground and background. A contrast stretching transformation can be achieved by: Stretching the dark range of input values into a wider range of output values: This involves increasing the brightness of the darker areas in the image to enhance details and improve visibility. Shifting the mid-range of input values: This involves adjusting the brightness levels of the mid-tones in the image to improve overall contrast and clarity. Compressing the bright range of input values: This process involves reducing the brightness of the brighter areas in the image to prevent overexposure resulting in a more balanced and visually appealing image. It can be described as the following piecewise funciton: I N = { s 1 r 1 I if I < r 1 s 2 − s 1 r 1 − r 2 ( I − r 1 ) if r 1 ≤ I ≤ r 2 1 − s 2 1 − r 2 ( I − r 2 ) if I > r 2 {\displaystyle I_{N}={\begin{cases}{\frac {s_{1}}{r_{1}}}I&{\text{if }}Ir_{2}\end{cases}}} Where: ( r 1 , s 1 ) {\displaystyle (r_{1},s_{1})} defines the transition point between the "dark" range to the "main" range. ( r 2 , s 2 ) {\displaystyle (r_{2},s_{2})} defines the transition point between the "main" range to the "bright" range. A typical linear stretch is obtained when ( r 1 , s 1 ) = ( r min , 0 ) {\displaystyle (r_{1},s_{1})=(r_{\text{min}},0)} and ( r 2 , s 2 ) = ( r max , 1 ) {\displaystyle (r_{2},s_{2})=(r_{\text{max}},1)} , where r min {\displaystyle r_{\text{min}}} and r max {\displaystyle r_{\text{max}}} denote the minimum and maximum levels in the source image. === Global contrast stretching === Global Contrast Stretching considers all color palate ranges at once to determine the maximum and minimum values for the entire RGB color image. This approach utilizes the combination of RGB colors to derive a single maximum and minimum value for contrast stretching across the entire image. === Local contrast stretching === Local contrast stretching (LCS) is an image enhancement method that focuses on locally adjusting each pixel's value to improve the visualization of structures within an image, particularly in both the darkest and lightest portions. It operates by utilizing sliding windows, known as kernels, which traverse the image. The central pixel within each kernel is adjusted using the following formula: I p ( x , y ) = 255 × [ I 0 ( x , y ) − m i n ] ( m a x − m i n ) {\displaystyle I_{p}(x,y)=255\times {\frac {[I_{0}(x,y)-min]}{(max-min)}}} Where: Ip(x,y) is the color level for the output pixel (x,y) after the contrast stretching process. I0(x,y) is the color level input for data pixel (x, y). max is the maximum value for color level in the input image within the selected kernel. min is the minimum value for color level in the input image within the selected kernel. A piecewise form (see above) may also be used. LCS can be applied to the three color channels of an image separately.
Read more →
TikTokification

TikTokification (also written TikTok-ification) is a term used to describe the widespread adoption of TikTok's short-form, vertical video format and its algorithmic content-delivery model across the broader social media landscape. The phenomenon encompasses the strategic and cultural changes made by competing platforms such as Instagram, YouTube, Facebook, Snapchat, and LinkedIn in response to TikTok's global dominance. Beyond platform design, the term is also used more broadly to describe shifts in media consumption habits, advertising strategies, and, more critically, the potential cognitive and psychological effects associated with constant short-form video consumption. == Background == === Origins of short-form video === The short-form video format predates TikTok. Vine, launched in 2013, popularised six-second looping videos before shutting down in 2017. TikTok itself, known as Douyin in the Chinese market, was created by the Chinese technology company ByteDance in September 2016. Following its international expansion and its 2018 merger with Musical.ly, TikTok grew rapidly. By 2020, the application had surpassed two billion total downloads worldwide, with over 800 million monthly active users. A key driver of TikTok's success was its recommendation algorithm. The platform's "For You Page" (FYP) serves content to users based on behaviour rather than follower count, making it possible for unknown creators to achieve widespread reach organically. Analysts noted that TikTok serves "fast, visually engaging, and authentic videos that feel more like entertainment than advertising," fundamentally reshaping consumer expectations of digital content. TikTok has been described as "the center of the internet for young people," where users go for entertainment, news, trends, and shopping. As of the mid-2020s, TikTok had approximately 1.12 billion monthly active users. == Platform responses == TikTok's success compelled nearly every major social media platform to restructure its product around short-form video. In 2020, Instagram launched Reels and YouTube launched Shorts, both directly in response to TikTok's growth. Platforms like Meta's Instagram Reels and Google's YouTube Shorts subsequently expanded aggressively, launching new features, creator tools, and even considering separate standalone applications to compete. LinkedIn, traditionally a professional networking site, began experimenting with TikTok-style short-form vertical video feeds. Facebook launched a singular unified video feed combining Reels, long videos, and live videos, similar in structure to TikTok's feed. Snapchat redesigned its application to combine Stories and Spotlight into a unified entertainment feed. YouTube extended its Shorts format to allow videos up to three minutes in length, up from the previous limit of sixty seconds, as of October 2024. Despite these adaptations, experts noted that none of TikTok's rivals had matched its algorithmic precision as of mid-2025. == Societal and cultural impact == === Media and journalism === News organisations have also been affected by TikTokification. Short-form video grew rapidly as a format for news content, driven in large part by TikTok's popularity. According to Pew Research Center, 17% of adults in the United States reported regularly getting news from TikTok in 2024, with 63% of teenagers saying they used the platform as a news source. In response, major publishers began creating bespoke short-form content for TikTok's audience, with organisations such as the BBC building dedicated internal TikTok teams. === Advertising and commerce === TikTokification has had significant effects on the advertising industry. US social video advertising spending was projected to surpass linear television advertising spending for the first time in 2025. Global social commerce sales were projected to reach approximately $900 billion in 2025, with platforms like Douyin and TikTok driving a large share of that growth. TikTok itself generated an estimated $23.6 billion in advertising revenue in 2024. Short-form video has been described as bridging the gap between brand awareness and direct conversion. Surveys have found that consumers trust user-generated content 8.7 times more than influencer content and 6.6 times more than branded content, prompting brands to favour creator-led video formats. === Attention spans and cognitive effects === A growing body of research has examined the cognitive consequences of heavy short-form video consumption, a set of effects sometimes referred to as "TikTok Brain." A large systematic review and meta-analysis published in Psychological Bulletin, analysing data from 98,299 participants across 71 studies, found that the more short-form video content a person watches, the poorer their cognitive performance in attention and inhibitory control. The review also found that greater engagement with short-form video was associated with higher levels of anxiety, depression, and stress, as well as sleep disturbances. The platform's inherent demand for engaging content has resulted in the proliferation of sludge content, a genre of split screen video with the main video on the top and an unrelated attention-grabbing video on the bottom, typically repetitive gameplay (notably of the endless runner mobile game Subway Surfers) or oddly satisfying videos, designed to maximize viewer retention in cases where the main video may appear uninteresting and would normally cause the viewer to skip it. Sludge content is often described as overstimulating, reflecting and contributing to declining attention spans, though the scholarly evidence supporting such claims is not conclusive. Dr. Yann Poncin, associate professor at the Child Study Center at Yale University, noted that "infinite scrolling and short-form video are designed to capture your attention in short bursts," contrasting this with earlier entertainment formats that guided audiences through longer narratives. Research suggests that children and teenagers may be particularly vulnerable, with early exposure to rapid frame changes potentially conditioning the brain's neural pathways to require constant stimulation, making it more challenging to engage with slower-paced activities. A separate study published in Nature Communications by researchers at the Technical University of Denmark documented a notable decrease in collective attention span over time, attributing it in part to the increasing volume and pace of content production and consumption online. Researchers caution, however, that the majority of relevant studies are cross-sectional, meaning they capture data at a single point in time and cannot establish causality. It remains possible that individuals with pre-existing conditions such as anxiety or attention deficits may be more likely to engage heavily with these platforms as a coping mechanism. === Academic and sociological analysis === Scholars have framed TikTokification within the context of the attention economy. A 2024 academic analysis described TikTok as representing "a new paradigm of social media communication" shaped by youth culture, mobile technology, and the economics of attention, in which spectators become active contributors to a shared content pipeline. The same analysis noted that TikTok "reflects a new mode of communication influenced by avant-garde cinema, the use of mobile technology, and the social habits of particular social groups." US social media users were projected to spend 61.1% of their time on social networks watching videos in 2025, up from 33.3% in 2019, before TikTok became widely popular, underscoring the scale of the behavioural shift. == Monetisation challenges == Despite high engagement levels, monetising short-form video has remained difficult for platforms and creators alike. Unlike long-form YouTube content, short clips offer limited space for advertisers to insert advertisements. YouTube Shorts pays approximately four cents per 1,000 views, considerably less than its long-form counterpart. From 2025 onward, platforms began introducing creator funds, advertisements, and AI-driven content recommendations as part of broader efforts to make short-form video economically sustainable for creators.
Read more →
Social media use in hiring

Social media use in hiring refers to the examination by employers of job applicants' (public) social media profiles as part of the hiring assessment. For example, the vast majority of Fortune 500 companies use social media as a tool to screen prospective employees and as a tool for talent acquisition. This practice raises ethical questions. Employers and recruiters note that they have access only to information that applicants choose to make public. Many Western-European countries restrict employer's use of social media in the workplace. States including Arkansas, California, Colorado, Illinois, Maryland, Michigan, Nevada, New Jersey, New Mexico, Utah, Washington, and Wisconsin protect applicants and employees from surrendering usernames and passwords for social media accounts. Use of social media has caused significant problems for some applicants who are active on social media. A 2013 survey of 17,000 young people in six countries found that one in ten people aged 16 to 34 claimed to have been rejected for a job because of social media activity. Social media services have been reported to affect deception in resumes. While these services do not affect deception frequency, it does increase deception about interests and hobbies. == Ethical implications == This issue raises many ethical questions that some consider an employer's right and others consider discrimination. As of 2016, except in the states of California, Maryland, and Illinois, there are no laws that prohibit employers from using social media profiles as a basis of whether or not someone should be hired. Title VII also prohibits discrimination during any aspect of employment including hiring or firing, recruitment, or testing. Social media has been integrating into the workplace, and this has led to conflicts within employees and employers.[107] Particularly, Facebook has been seen as a popular platform for employers to investigate in order to learn more about potential employees. This conflict first started in Maryland when an employer requested and received an employee's Facebook username and password. State lawmakers first introduced legislation in 2012 to prohibit employers from requesting passwords to personal social accounts in order to get a job or to keep a job. This led to Canada, Germany, the U.S. Congress and 11 U.S. states to pass or propose legislation that prevents employers' access to private social accounts of employees.[108] Many Western European countries have already implemented laws that restrict the regulation of social media in the workplace. States including Arkansas, California, Colorado, Illinois, Maryland, Michigan, Nevada, New Jersey, New Mexico, Utah, Washington, and Wisconsin have passed legislation that protects potential employees and current employees from employers that demand them to give forth their username or password for a social media account. Laws that forbid employers from disciplining an employee based on activity off the job on social media sites have also been put into act in states including California, Colorado, Connecticut, North Dakota, and New York. Several states have similar laws that protect students in colleges and universities from having to grant access to their social media accounts. Eight states have passed the law that prohibits post secondary institutions from demanding social media login information from any prospective or current students and privacy legislation has been introduced or is pending in at least 36 states as of July 2013. As of May 2014, legislation has been introduced and is in the process of pending in at least 28 states and has been enacted in Maine and Wisconsin. In addition, the National Labor Relations Board has been devoting a lot of their attention to attacking employer policies regarding social media that can discipline employees who seek to speak and post freely on social media sites. Use of social media by young people has caused significant problems for some applicants who are active on social media when they try to enter the job market. A survey of 17,000 young people in six countries in 2013 found that 1 in 10 people aged 16 to 34 have been rejected for a job because of online comments they made on social media websites. A 2014 survey of recruiters found that 93% of them check candidates' social media postings. Moreover, professor Stijn Baert of Ghent University conducted a field experiment in which fictitious job candidates applied for real job vacancies in Belgium. They were identical except in one respect: their Facebook profile photos. It was found that candidates with the most wholesome photos were a lot more likely to receive invitations for job interviews than those with the more controversial photos. In addition, Facebook profile photos had a greater impact on hiring decisions when candidates were highly educated. These cases have created some privacy implications as to whether or not companies should have the right to look at employee's Facebook profiles. In March 2012, Facebook decided they might take legal action against employers for gaining access to employee's profiles through their passwords. According to Facebook Chief Privacy Officer for policy, Erin Egan, the company has worked hard to give its users the tools to control who sees their information. He also said users shouldn't be forced to share private information and communications just to get a job. According to the network's Statement of Rights and Responsibilities, sharing or soliciting a password is a violation of Facebook policy. Employees may still give their password information out to get a job, but according to Erin Egan, Facebook will continue to do their part to protect the privacy and security of their users. == Impacts == Use of social media by young people has caused significant problems for some applicants who are active on social media when they try to enter the job market. A survey of 17,000 young people in six countries in 2013 found that 1 in 10 people aged 16 to 34 have been rejected for a job because of online comments they made on social media websites. A 2014 survey of recruiters found that 93% of them check candidates' social media postings. Moreover, in 2015 professor Stijn Baert of Ghent University conducted a field experiment in which fictitious job candidates applied for real job vacancies in Belgium. They were identical except in one respect: their Facebook profile photos. It was found that candidates with the most wholesome photos were a lot more likely to receive invitations for job interviews than those with the more controversial photos. In addition, Facebook profile photos had a greater impact on hiring decisions when candidates were highly educated. These cases have created some privacy implications as to whether or not companies should have the right to look at employee's Facebook profiles. In March 2012, Facebook decided they might take legal action against employers for gaining access to employee's profiles through their passwords. According to Facebook Chief Privacy Officer for policy, Erin Egan, the company has worked hard to give its users the tools to control who sees their information. He also said users shouldn't be forced to share private information and communications just to get a job. According to the network's Statement of Rights and Responsibilities, sharing or soliciting a password is a violation of Facebook policy. Employees may still give their password information out to get a job, but according to Erin Egan, Facebook will continue to do their part to protect the privacy and security of their users. == Policy Responses == 26 US states now have laws against an employer requiring a current or potential employee to give the employer their username and password.
Read more →