AI Chat Character Talkie

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

• 

  AIOps

  AIOps (Artificial Intelligence for IT Operations) refers to the use of artificial intelligence, machine learning, and big data analytics to automate and enhance data center management. It helps organizations manage complex IT environments by detecting, diagnosing, and resolving issues more efficiently than traditional methods. == History == AIOps was first defined by Gartner in 2016, combining "artificial intelligence" and "IT operations" to describe the application of AI and machine learning to enhance IT operations. This concept was introduced to address the increasing complexity and data volume in IT environments, aiming to automate processes such as event correlation, anomaly detection, and causality determination. == Definition == AIOps refers to multi-layered, complex technology platforms that enhance and automate IT operations by using machine learning and analytics to analyze the large amounts of data collected from various DevOps devices and tools, automatically identifying and responding to issues in real-time. AIOps represents a shift from isolated IT data to aggregated observational data (e.g., job logs and monitoring systems) and interaction data (such as ticketing, events, or incident records) within a big data platform. AIOps applies machine learning and analytics to this data, resulting in continuous visibility that, when combined with automation, can lead to ongoing improvements. AIOps connects three IT disciplines (automation, service management, and performance management) to achieve continuous visibility and improvement. This new approach in modern, accelerated, and hyper-scaled IT environments leverages advances in machine learning and big data to overcome previous limitations. == Components == AIOps includes, but is not limited to, the following processes and techniques: Anomaly Detection Log Analysis Root Cause Analysis Cohort Analysis Event Correlation Predictive Analytics Hardware Failure Prediction Automated Remediation Performance Prediction Incident Management Causality Determination Queue Management Resource Scheduling and Optimization Predictive Capacity Management Resource Allocation Service Quality Monitoring Deployment and Integration Testing System Configuration Auto-diagnosis and Problem Localization Efficient ML Training and Inferencing Using LLMs for Cloud Ops Auto Service Healing Data Center Management Customer Support Security and Privacy in Cloud Operations == Comparison with DevOps == AIOps is increasingly compared with DevOps in terms of impact on operational efficiency. While DevOps focuses on collaboration between development and operations teams to accelerate software delivery, AIOps integrates artificial intelligence to enhance monitoring, automation, and predictive capabilities. Various industry analyses have explored the similarities and differences between the two approaches, including discussions on how organizations can combine them to improve incident management and resource optimization. == Results == AI optimizes IT operations in five ways: First, intelligent monitoring powered by AI helps identify potential issues before they cause outages, improving metrics like Mean Time to Detect (MTTD) by 15-20%. Second, performance data analysis and insights enable quick decision-making by ingesting and analyzing large data sets in real time. Third, AI-driven automated infrastructure optimization efficiently allocates resources and thereby reducing cloud costs. Fourth, enhanced IT service management reduces critical incidents by over 50% through AI-driven end-to-end service management. Lastly, intelligent task automation accelerates problem resolution and automates remedial actions with minimal human intervention. In 2025, Atera Networks was identified as a leader in AIOps by the software review platform G2. == AIOps vs. MLOps == AIOps tools use big data analytics, machine learning algorithms, and predictive analytics to detect anomalies, correlate events, and provide proactive insights. This automation reduces the burden on IT teams, allowing them to focus on strategic tasks rather than routine operational issues. AIOps is widely used by IT operations teams, DevOps, network administrators, and IT service management (ITSM) teams to enhance visibility and enable quicker incident resolution in hybrid cloud environments, data centers, and other IT infrastructures. In contrast to MLOps (Machine Learning Operations), which focuses on the lifecycle management and operational aspects of machine learning models, AIOps focuses on optimizing IT operations using a variety of analytics and AI-driven techniques. While both disciplines rely on AI and data-driven methods, AIOps primarily targets IT operations, whereas MLOps is concerned with the deployment, monitoring, and maintenance of ML models. == Conferences == There are several conferences that are specific to AIOps: AIOps Summit AI Dev Summit IBM Think conference

  Read more →
• 

  CrySyS Lab

  CrySyS Lab (Hungarian pronunciation: [ˈkriːsis]) is part of the Department of Telecommunications at the Budapest University of Technology and Economics. The name is derived from "Laboratory of Cryptography and System Security", the full Hungarian name is CrySys Adat- és Rendszerbiztonság Laboratórium. == History == CrySyS Lab. was founded in 2003 by a group of security researchers at the Budapest University of Technology and Economics. Currently, it is located in the Infopark Budapest. The heads of the lab were Dr. István Vajda (2003–2010) and Dr. Levente Buttyán (2010-now). Since its establishment, the lab participated in several research and industry projects, including successful EU FP6 and FP7 projects (SeVeCom, a UbiSecSens and WSAN4CIP). == Research results == CrySyS Lab is recognized in research for its contribution to the area of security in wireless embedded systems. In this area, the members of the lab produced 5 books 4 book chapters 21 journal papers 47 conference papers 3 patents 2 Internet Draft The above publications had an impact factor of 30+ and obtained more than 7500 references. Several of these publications appeared in highly cited journals (e.g., IEEE Transactions on Dependable and Secure Systems, IEEE Transactions on Mobile Computing). == Forensics analysis of malware incidents == The laboratory was involved in the forensic analysis of several high-profile targeted attacks. In October 2011, CrySyS Lab discovered the Duqu malware; pursued the analysis of the Duqu malware and as a result of the investigation, identified a dropper file with an MS 0-day kernel exploit inside; and finally released a new open-source Duqu Detector Toolkit to detect Duqu traces and running Duqu instances. In May 2012, the malware analysis team at CrySyS Lab participated in an international collaboration aiming at the analysis of an as yet unknown malware, which they call sKyWIper. At the same time Kaspersky Lab analyzed the malware Flame and Iran National CERT (MAHER) the malware Flamer. Later, they turned out to be the same. Other analysis published by CrySyS Lab include the password analysis of the Hungarian ISP, Elender, and a thorough Hungarian security survey of servers after the publications of the Kaminsky DNS attack.

  Read more →
• 

  Signals intelligence

  Signals intelligence (SIGINT) is the act and field of intelligence-gathering by interception of signals, whether communications between people (communications intelligence—abbreviated to COMINT) or from electronic signals not directly used in communication (electronic intelligence—abbreviated to ELINT). As classified and sensitive information is usually encrypted, signals intelligence may necessarily involve cryptanalysis (to decipher the messages). Traffic analysis—the study of who is signaling to whom and in what quantity—is also used to integrate information, and it may complement cryptanalysis. == History == === Origins === Electronic interceptions appeared as early as 1900, during the Boer War of 1899–1902. The British Royal Navy had installed wireless sets produced by Marconi on board their ships in the late 1890s, and the British Army used some limited wireless signalling. The Boers captured some wireless sets and used them to make vital transmissions. Since the British were the only people transmitting at the time, the British did not need special interpretation of the signals that they were. The birth of signals intelligence in a modern sense dates from the Russo-Japanese War of 1904–1905. As the Russian fleet prepared for conflict with Japan in 1904, the British ship HMS Diana stationed in the Suez Canal intercepted Russian naval wireless signals being sent out for the mobilization of the fleet, for the first time in history. === Development in World War I === Over the course of the First World War, a new method of signals intelligence reached maturity. Russia's failure to properly protect its communications fatally compromised the Russian Army's advance early in World War I and led to their disastrous defeat by the Germans under Ludendorff and Hindenburg at the Battle of Tannenberg. In 1918, French intercept personnel captured a message written in the new ADFGVX cipher, which was cryptanalyzed by Georges Painvin. This gave the Allies advance warning of the German 1918 Spring Offensive. The British in particular, built up great expertise in the newly emerging field of signals intelligence and codebreaking (synonymous with cryptanalysis). On the declaration of war, Britain cut all German undersea cables. This forced the Germans to communicate exclusively via either (A) a telegraph line that connected through the British network and thus could be tapped; or (B) through radio which the British could then intercept. Rear Admiral Henry Oliver appointed Sir Alfred Ewing to establish an interception and decryption service at the Admiralty; Room 40. An interception service known as 'Y' service, together with the post office and Marconi stations, grew rapidly to the point where the British could intercept almost all official German messages. The German fleet was in the habit each day of wirelessing the exact position of each ship and giving regular position reports when at sea. It was possible to build up a precise picture of the normal operation of the High Seas Fleet, to infer from the routes they chose where defensive minefields had been placed and where it was safe for ships to operate. Whenever a change to the normal pattern was seen, it immediately signalled that some operation was about to take place, and a warning could be given. Detailed information about submarine movements was also available. The use of radio-receiving equipment to pinpoint the location of any single transmitter was also developed during the war. Captain H.J. Round, working for Marconi, began carrying out experiments with direction-finding radio equipment for the army in France in 1915. By May 1915, the Admiralty was able to track German submarines crossing the North Sea. Some of these stations also acted as 'Y' stations to collect German messages, but a new section was created within Room 40 to plot the positions of ships from the directional reports. Room 40 played an important role in several naval engagements during the war, notably in detecting major German sorties into the North Sea. The battle of Dogger Bank was won in no small part due to the intercepts that allowed the Navy to position its ships in the right place. It played a vital role in subsequent naval clashes, including at the Battle of Jutland as the British fleet was sent out to intercept them. The direction-finding capability allowed for the tracking and location of German ships, submarines, and Zeppelins. The system was so successful that by the end of the war, over 80 million words, comprising the totality of German wireless transmission over the course of the war, had been intercepted by the operators of the Y-stations and decrypted. However, its most astonishing success was in decrypting the Zimmermann Telegram, a telegram from the German Foreign Office sent via Washington to its ambassador Heinrich von Eckardt in Mexico. === Postwar consolidation === With the importance of interception and decryption firmly established by the wartime experience, countries established permanent agencies dedicated to this task in the interwar period. In 1919, the British Cabinet's Secret Service Committee, chaired by Lord Curzon, recommended that a peace-time codebreaking agency should be created. The Government Code and Cypher School (GC&CS) was the first peace-time codebreaking agency, with a public function "to advise as to the security of codes and cyphers used by all Government departments and to assist in their provision", but also with a secret directive to "study the methods of cypher communications used by foreign powers". GC&CS officially formed on 1 November 1919, and produced its first decrypt on 19 October. By 1940, GC&CS was working on the diplomatic codes and ciphers of 26 countries, tackling over 150 diplomatic cryptosystems. The US Cipher Bureau was established in 1919 and achieved some success at the Washington Naval Conference in 1921, through cryptanalysis by Herbert Yardley. Secretary of War Henry L. Stimson closed the US Cipher Bureau in 1929 with the words "Gentlemen do not read each other's mail." === World War II === The use of SIGINT had even greater implications during World War II. The combined effort of intercepts and cryptanalysis for the whole of the British forces in World War II came under the code name "Ultra", managed from Government Code and Cypher School at Bletchley Park. Properly used, the German Enigma and Lorenz ciphers should have been virtually unbreakable, but flaws in German cryptographic procedures, and poor discipline among the personnel carrying them out, created vulnerabilities which made Bletchley's attacks feasible. Bletchley's work was essential to defeating the U-boats in the Battle of the Atlantic, and to the British naval victories in the Battle of Cape Matapan and the Battle of North Cape. In 1941, Ultra exerted a powerful effect on the North African desert campaign against German forces under General Erwin Rommel. General Sir Claude Auchinleck wrote that were it not for Ultra, "Rommel would have certainly got through to Cairo". Ultra decrypts featured prominently in the story of Operation SALAM, László Almásy's mission across the desert behind Allied lines in 1942. Prior to the Normandy landings on D-Day in June 1944, the Allies knew the locations of all but two of Germany's fifty-eight Western Front divisions. Winston Churchill was reported to have told King George VI: "It is thanks to the secret weapon of General Menzies, put into use on all the fronts, that we won the war!" Supreme Allied Commander, Dwight D. Eisenhower, at the end of the war, described Ultra as having been "decisive" to Allied victory. Official historian of British Intelligence in World War II Sir Harry Hinsley argued that Ultra shortened the war "by not less than two years and probably by four years"; and that, in the absence of Ultra, it is uncertain how the war would have ended. At a lower level, German cryptanalysis, direction finding, and traffic analysis were vital to Rommel's early successes in the Western Desert Campaign until British forces tightened their communications discipline and Australian raiders destroyed his principal SIGINT Company. == Technical definitions == The United States Department of Defense has defined the term "signals intelligence" as: A category of intelligence comprising either individually or in combination all communications intelligence (COMINT), electronic intelligence (ELINT), and foreign instrumentation signals intelligence (FISINT), however transmitted. Intelligence derived from communications, electronic, and foreign instrumentation signals. Being a broad field, SIGINT has many sub-disciplines. The two main ones are communications intelligence (COMINT) and electronic intelligence (ELINT). == Disciplines shared across the branches == === Targeting === A collection system has to know to look for a particular signal. "System", in this context, has several nuances. Targeting is the process of developing collection requirements: "1. A

  Read more →
• 

  Control break

  In computer programming, a control break is a change in the value of one of the keys on which a file is sorted, which requires some extra processing. For example, with an input file sorted by post code, the number of items found in each postal district might need to be printed on a report, and a heading shown for the next district. Quite often there is a hierarchy of nested control breaks in a program, such as streets within districts within areas, with the need for a grand total at the end. Structured programming techniques have been developed to ensure correct processing of control breaks in languages such as COBOL and to ensure that conditions such as empty input files and sequence errors are handled properly. With fourth-generation languages such as SQL, the programming language should handle most of the details of control breaks automatically.

  Read more →
• 

  Software engine

  A software engine is a core component of a complex software system. The word "engine" is a metaphor of a car's engine. Thus a software engine is a complex subsystem; not unlike how a car engine functions. Software engines work in conjunction with other components of a process or system. They typically have an input and an output, and the productivity is usually linear to running speed. There is no formal guideline for what should be called an engine, but the term has become widespread in the software industry. == Notable examples == === Multi-engine systems === Mainstream web browsers have both a browser engine and a JavaScript engine. Video games are often based on a game engine. Some of these also have specialized physics or graphics engines.

  Read more →
• 

  Critical data studies

  Critical data studies is the exploration of and engagement with social, cultural, and ethical challenges that arise when working with big data. It is through various unique perspectives and taking a critical approach that this form of study can be practiced. As its name implies, critical data studies draws heavily on the influence of critical theory, which has a strong focus on addressing the organization of power structures. This idea is then applied to the study of data. Interest in this unique field of critical data studies began in 2011 with scholars danah boyd and Kate Crawford posing various questions for the critical study of big data and recognizing its potential threatening impacts on society and culture. It was not until 2014, and more exploration and conversations, that critical data studies was officially coined by scholars Craig Dalton and Jim Thatcher. They put a large emphasis on understanding the context of big data in order to approach it more critically. Researchers such as David Ribes, Robert Soden, Seyram Avle, Sarah E. Fox, and Phoebe Sengers focus on understanding data as a historical artifact and taking an interdisciplinary approach towards critical data studies. Other key scholars in this discipline include Rob Kitchin and Tracey P. Lauriault who focus on reevaluating data through different spheres. Various critical frameworks that can be applied to analyze big data include Feminist, Anti-Racist, Queer, Indigenous, Decolonial, Anti-Ableist, as well as Symbolic and Synthetic data science. These frameworks help to make sense of the data by addressing power, biases, privacy, consent, and underrepresentation or misrepresentation concerns that exist in data as well as how to approach and analyze this data with a more equitable mindset. == Motivation == In their article in which they coin the term 'critical data studies,' Dalton and Thatcher also provide several justifications as to why data studies is a discipline worthy of a critical approach. First, 'big data' is an important aspect of twenty-first century society, and the analysis of 'big data' allows for a deeper understanding of what is happening and for what reasons. Big data is important to critical data studies because it is the type of data used within this field. Big data does not necessarily refer to a large data set, it can have a data set with millions of rows, but also a data set that just has a wide variety and expansive scope of data with a smaller type of dataset. As well as having whole populations in the data set and not just sample sizes. Furthermore, big data as a technological tool and the information that it yields are not neutral, according to Dalton and Thatcher, making it worthy of critical analysis in order to identify and address its biases. Building off this idea, another justification for a critical approach is that the relationship between big data and society is an important one, and therefore worthy of study. Ribes et. al. argue there is a need for an interdisciplinary understanding of data as a historical artifact as a motivating aspect of critical data studies.The overarching consensus in the Computer-Supported Cooperative Work (CSCW) field, is that people should speak for the data, and not let the data speak for itself. The sources of big data and it’s relationship to varied metadata can be a complicated one, which leads to data disorder and a need for an ethical analysis. Additionally, Iliadis and Russo (2016) have called for studying data assemblages. This is to say, data has innate technological, political, social, and economic histories that should be taken into consideration. Kitchin argues data is almost never raw, and it is almost always cooked, meaning that it is always spoken for by the data scientists utilizing it. Thus, Big Data should be open to a variety of perspectives, especially those of cultural and philosophical nature. Further, data contains hidden histories, ideologies, and philosophies. Big data technology can cause significant changes in society's structure and in the everyday lives of people, and, being a product of society, big data technology is worthy of sociological investigation. Moreover, data sets are almost never completely without any influence. Rather, data are shaped by the vision or goals of those gathering the data, and during the data collection process, certain things are quantified, stored, sorted and even discarded by the research team. A critical approach is thus necessary in order to understand and reveal the intent behind the information being presented.One of these critical approaches has been through feminist data studies. This method applies feminist principles to critical studies and data collecting and analysis. The goal of this is to address the power imbalance in data science and society. According to Catherine D’Ignazio and Lauren F. Klein, a power analysis can be performed by examining power, challenging power, evaluating emotion and embodiment, rethinking binaries and hierarchies, embracing pluralism, considering context, and making labor visible. Feminist data studies is part of the movement towards making data to benefit everyone and not to increase existing inequalities. Moreover, data alone cannot speak for themselves; in order to possess any concrete meaning, data must be accompanied by theoretical insight or alternative quantitative or qualitative research measures. Based on different social topics such as anti-racist data studies, critical data studies give a focus on those social issues concerning data. Specifically in anti-racist data studies they use a classification approach to get representation for those within that community. Desmond Upton Patton and others used their own classification system in the communities of Chicago to help target and reduce violence with young teens on twitter. They had students in those communities help them to decipher the terminology and emojis of these teens to target the language used in tweets that followed with violence outside of the computer screens. This is just one real world example of critical data studies and its application. Dalton and Thatcher argue that if one were to only think of data in terms of its exploitative power, there is no possibility of using data for revolutionary, liberatory purposes. Finally, Dalton and Thatcher propose that a critical approach in studying data allows for 'big data' to be combined with older, 'small data,' and thus create more thorough research, opening up more opportunities, questions and topics to be explored. == Issues and concerns for critical data scholars == Data plays a pivotal role in the emerging knowledge economy, driving productivity, competitiveness, efficiency, sustainability, and capital accumulation. The ethical, political, and economic dimensions of data dynamically evolve across space and time, influenced by changing regimes, technologies, and priorities. Technically, the focus lies on handling, storing, and analyzing vast data sets, utilizing machine learning-based data mining and analytics. This technological advancement raises concerns about data quality, encompassing validity, reliability, authenticity, usability, and lineage. The use of data in modern society brings about new ways of understanding and measuring the world, but also brings with it certain concerns or issues. Data scholars attempt to bring some of these issues to light in their quest to be critical of data. Technical and organizational issues could include the scope of the data set, meaning there is too little or too much data to work with, leading to inaccurate results. It becomes crucial for critical data scholars to carefully consider the adequacy of data volume for their analyses. The quality of the data itself is another facet of concern. The data itself could be of poor quality, such as an incomplete or messy data set with missing or inaccurate data values. This would lead researchers to have to make edits and assumptions about the data itself. Addressing these issues often requires scholars to make edits and assumptions about the data to ensure its reliability and relevance. Data scientists could have improper access to the actual data set, limiting their abilities to analyze it. Linnet Taylor explains how gaps in data can arise when people of varying levels of power have certain rights to their data sources. These people in power can control what data is collected, how it is displayed and how it is analyzed. The capabilities of the research team also play a crucial role in the quality of data analytics. The research team may have inadequate skills or organizational capabilities which leads to the actual analytics performed on the dataset to be biased. This can also lead to ecological fallacies, meaning an assumption is made about an individual based on data or results from a larger group of people. These technical and organizational challenges highlight the complexity of working with data and

  Read more →
• 

  Scalable Coherent Interface

  The Scalable Coherent Interface or Scalable Coherent Interconnect (SCI), is a high-speed interconnect standard for shared memory multiprocessing and message passing. The goal was to scale well, provide system-wide memory coherence and a simple interface; i.e. a standard to replace existing buses in multiprocessor systems with one with no inherent scalability and performance limitations. The IEEE Std 1596-1992, IEEE Standard for Scalable Coherent Interface (SCI) was approved by the IEEE standards board on March 19, 1992. It saw some use during the 1990s, but never became widely used and has been replaced by other systems from the early 2000s. == History == Soon after the Fastbus (IEEE 960) follow-on Futurebus (IEEE 896) project in 1987, some engineers predicted it would already be too slow for the high performance computing marketplace by the time it would be released in the early 1990s. In response, a "Superbus" study group was formed in November 1987. Another working group of the standards association of the Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers (IEEE) spun off to form a standard targeted at this market in July 1988. It was essentially a subset of Futurebus features that could be easily implemented at high speed, along with minor additions to make it easier to connect to other systems, such as VMEbus. Most of the developers had their background from high-speed computer buses. Representatives from companies in the computer industry and research community included Amdahl, Apple Computer, BB&N, Hewlett-Packard, CERN, Dolphin Server Technology, Cray Research, Sequent, AT&T, Digital Equipment Corporation, McDonnell Douglas, National Semiconductor, Stanford Linear Accelerator Center, Tektronix, Texas Instruments, Unisys, University of Oslo, University of Wisconsin. The original intent was a single standard for all buses in the computer. The working group soon came up with the idea of using point-to-point communication in the form of insertion rings. This avoided the lumped capacitance, limited physical length/speed of light problems and stub reflections in addition to allowing parallel transactions. The use of insertion rings is credited to Manolis Katevenis who suggested it at one of the early meetings of the working group. The working group for developing the standard was led by David B. Gustavson (chair) and David V. James (Vice Chair). David V. James was a major contributor for writing the specifications including the executable C-code. Stein Gjessing’s group at the University of Oslo used formal methods to verify the coherence protocol and Dolphin Server Technology implemented a node controller chip including the cache coherence logic. Different versions and derivatives of SCI were implemented by companies like Dolphin Interconnect Solutions, Convex, Data General AViiON (using cache controller and link controller chips from Dolphin), Sequent and Cray Research. Dolphin Interconnect Solutions implemented a PCI and PCI-Express connected derivative of SCI that provides non-coherent shared memory access. This implementation was used by Sun Microsystems for its high-end clusters, Thales Group and several others including volume applications for message passing within HPC clustering and medical imaging. SCI was often used to implement non-uniform memory access architectures. It was also used by Sequent Computer Systems as the processor memory bus in their NUMA-Q systems. Numascale developed a derivative to connect with coherent HyperTransport. == The standard == The standard defined two interface levels: The physical level that deals with electrical signals, connectors, mechanical and thermal conditions The logical level that describes the address space, data transfer protocols, cache coherence mechanisms, synchronization primitives, control and status registers, and initialization and error recovery facilities. This structure allowed new developments in physical interface technology to be easily adapted without any redesign on the logical level. Scalability for large systems is achieved through a distributed directory-based cache coherence model. (The other popular models for cache coherency are based on system-wide eavesdropping (snooping) of memory transactions – a scheme which is not very scalable.) In SCI each node contains a directory with a pointer to the next node in a linked list that shares a particular cache line. SCI defines a 64-bit flat address space (16 exabytes) where 16 bits are used for identifying a node (65,536 nodes) and 48 bits for address within the node (256 terabytes). A node can contain many processors and/or memory. The SCI standard defines a packet switched network. === Topologies === SCI can be used to build systems with different types of switching topologies from centralized to fully distributed switching: With a central switch, each node is connected to the switch with a ringlet (in this case a two-node ring). In distributed switching systems, each node can be connected to a ring of arbitrary length and either all or some of the nodes can be connected to two or more rings. The most common way to describe these multi-dimensional topologies is k-ary n-cubes (or tori). The SCI standard specification mentions several such topologies as examples. The 2-D torus is a combination of rings in two dimensions. Switching between the two dimensions requires a small switching capability in the node. This can be expanded to three or more dimensions. The concept of folding rings can also be applied to the Torus topologies to avoid any long connection segments. === Transactions === SCI sends information in packets. Each packet consists of an unbroken sequence of 16-bit symbols. The symbol is accompanied by a flag bit. A transition of the flag bit from 0 to 1 indicates the start of a packet. A transition from 1 to 0 occurs 1 (for echoes) or 4 symbols before the packet end. A packet contains a header with address command and status information, payload (from 0 through optional lengths of data) and a CRC check symbol. The first symbol in the packet header contains the destination node address. If the address is not within the domain handled by the receiving node, the packet is passed to the output through the bypass FIFO. In the other case, the packet is fed to a receive queue and may be transferred to a ring in another dimension. All packets are marked when they pass the scrubber (a node is established as scrubber when the ring is initialized). Packets without a valid destination address will be removed when passing the scrubber for the second time to avoid filling the ring with packets that would otherwise circulate indefinitely. === Cache coherence === Cache coherence ensures data consistency in multiprocessor systems. The simplest form applied in earlier systems was based on clearing the cache contents between context switches and disabling the cache for data that were shared between two or more processors. These methods were feasible when the performance difference between the cache and memory were less than one order of magnitude. Modern processors with caches that are more than two orders of magnitude faster than main memory would not perform anywhere near optimal without more sophisticated methods for data consistency. Bus based systems use eavesdropping (snooping) methods since buses are inherently broadcast. Modern systems with point-to point links use broadcast methods with snoop filter options to improve performance. Since broadcast and eavesdropping are inherently non-scalable, these are not used in SCI. Instead, SCI uses a distributed directory-based cache coherence protocol with a linked list of nodes containing processors that share a particular cache line. Each node holds a directory for the main memory of the node with a tag for each line of memory (same line length as the cache line). The memory tag holds a pointer to the head of the linked list and a state code for the line (three states – home, fresh, gone). Associated with each node is also a cache for holding remote data with a directory containing forward and backward pointers to nodes in the linked list sharing the cache line. The tag for the cache has seven states (invalid, only fresh, head fresh, only dirty, head dirty, mid valid, tail valid). The distributed directory is scalable. The overhead for the directory based cache coherence is a constant percentage of the node’s memory and cache. This percentage is in the order of 4% for the memory and 7% for the cache. == Legacy == SCI is a standard for connecting the different resources within a multiprocessor computer system, and it is not as widely known to the public as for example the Ethernet family for connecting different systems. Different system vendors implemented different variants of SCI for their internal system infrastructure. These different implementations interface to very intricate mechanisms in processors and memory systems and each vendor has to preserve some degrees of

  Read more →
• 

  Semiotics of social networking

  The semiotics of social networking discusses the images, symbols and signs used in systems that allow users to communicate and share experiences with each other. Examples of social networking systems include Facebook, Twitter and Instagram. == Semiotics == Semiotics is a discipline that studies images, symbols, signs and other similarly related objects in an effort to understand their use and meaning. Semiotic structuralism seeks the meaning of these objects within a social context. Post-structuralist theories take tools from structuralist semiotics in combination with social interaction, creating social semiotics. Social semiotics is “a branch of the field of semiotics which investigates human signifying practices in specific social and cultural circumstances and which tries to explain meaning-making as a social practice.” “Social semiotics also examines semiotic practices, specific to a culture and community, for the making of various kinds of texts and meanings in various situational contexts and contexts of culturally meaningful activity”. Social semiotics is concerned with studying human interactions. == Social networking == Social networking is the communication among people within a virtual social space. This medium of communication allows insight into the significance of social semiotics. “Millions of people now interact through blogs, collaborate through wikis, play multiplayer games, publish podcasts and video, build relationships through social network sites and evaluate all the above forms of communication through feedback and ranking mechanisms”. Social semiotics “unlike speech, writing necessitates some sort of technology in the form of person device interaction”. Social semiotics functions through the triad of communication or Peircean semiotics in the form of sign, object, interpretant (Chart 1) and “Human, Machine, Tag (Information)” (Chart 2). In Peircean semiotics (Chart 1), "A sign…[in the form of representamen] is something which stands to somebody for something in some respect or capacity. It addresses somebody, that is, creates in the mind of that person an equivalent sign, or perhaps a more developed sign. That sign which it creates I call the interpretant of the first sign. The sign stands for an object, not in all respects, but in reference to a sort of idea which I have something called the ground of the representamen". This example of the triangle of Human, Machine, Tag is shown when looking at tagging photographs on Facebook (Chart 3). The Human takes the photo on a camera and puts the digital file (information) on the Machine, the Machine is then navigated to Facebook where the file is downloaded. The Human has the Machine Tag the photo with information (e. g., names, places, data) for other Humans to see. This process then can be continued (see Chart 2). “Collaborative tagging has been quickly gaining ground because of its ability to recruit the activity of web users into effectively organizing and sharing large amounts of information”.

  Read more →
• 

  Wetware computer

  A wetware computer is an organic computer (which can also be known as an artificial organic brain or a neurocomputer) composed of organic material "wetware" such as "living" neurons. Wetware computers composed of neurons are different than conventional computers because they use biological materials, and offer the possibility of substantially more energy-efficient computing. While a wetware computer is still largely conceptual, there has been limited success with construction and prototyping, which has acted as a proof of the concept's realistic application to computing in the future. The most notable prototypes have stemmed from the research completed by biological engineer William Ditto during his time at the Georgia Institute of Technology. His work constructing a simple neurocomputer capable of basic addition from leech neurons in 1999 was a significant discovery for the concept. This research was a primary example driving interest in creating these artificially constructed, but still organic brains. == Origins and theoretical foundations == The term wetware came from cyberpunk fiction, notably through Gibson's Neuromancer, but was quickly taken up in scientific literature to explain computation by biological material. Theories of early biological computation borrowed from Alan Turing's morphogenesis model, which showed that chemical interactions could produce complex patterns without centralized control. Hopfield's associative memory networks also provided a foundation for biological information systems with fault tolerance and self-organization. == Major characteristics and processes == Biological wetware systems demonstrate dynamic reconfigurability underpinned by neuroplasticity and enable continuous learning and adaptation. Reaction-diffusion-based computing and molecular logic gates allow spatially parallel information processing unachievable in conventional systems. These systems also show fault tolerance and self-repair at the cellular and network level. The development of cerebral organoids—miniature lab-grown brains—demonstrates spontaneous learning behavior and suggests biological tissue as a viable computational substrate. == Overview == The concept of wetware is an application of specific interest to the field of computer manufacturing. Moore's law, which states that the number of transistors which can be placed on a silicon chip is doubled roughly every two years, has acted as a goal for the industry for decades, but as the size of computers continues to decrease, the ability to meet this goal has become more difficult, threatening to reach a plateau. Due to the difficulty in reducing the size of computers because of size limitations of transistors and integrated circuits, wetware provides an unconventional alternative. A wetware computer composed of neurons is an ideal concept because, unlike conventional materials which operate in binary (on/off), a neuron can shift between thousands of states, constantly altering its chemical conformation, and redirecting electrical pulses through over 200,000 channels in any of its many synaptic connections. Because of this large difference in the possible settings for any one neuron, compared to the binary limitations of conventional computers, the space limitations are far fewer. == Background == The concept of wetware is distinct and unconventional and draws slight resonance with both hardware and software from conventional computers. While hardware is understood as the physical architecture of traditional computational devices, comprising integrated circuits and supporting infrastructure, software represents the encoded architecture of storage and instructions. Wetware is a separate concept that uses the formation of organic molecules, mostly complex cellular structures (such as neurons), to create a computational device such as a computer. In wetware, the ideas of hardware and software are intertwined and interdependent. The molecular and chemical composition of the organic or biological structure would represent not only the physical structure of the wetware but also the software, being continually reprogrammed by the discrete shifts in electrical pulses and chemical concentration gradients as the molecules change their structures to communicate signals. The responsiveness of a cell, proteins, and molecules to changing conformations, both within their structures and around them, ties the idea of internal programming and external structure together in a way that is alien to the current model of conventional computer architecture. The structure of wetware represents a model where the external structure and internal programming are interdependent and unified; meaning that changes to the programming or internal communication between molecules of the device would represent a physical change in the structure. The dynamic nature of wetware borrows from the function of complex cellular structures in biological organisms. The combination of "hardware" and "software" into one dynamic, and interdependent system which uses organic molecules and complexes to create an unconventional model for computational devices is a specific example of applied biorobotics. === The cell as a model of wetware === Cells in many ways can be seen as their form of naturally occurring wetware, similar to the concept that the human brain is the preexisting model system for complex wetware. In his book Wetware: A Computer in Every Living Cell (2009) Dennis Bray explains his theory that cells, which are the most basic form of life, are just a highly complex computational structure, like a computer. To simplify one of his arguments a cell can be seen as a type of computer, using its structured architecture. In this architecture, much like a traditional computer, many smaller components operate in tandem to receive input, process the information, and compute an output. In an overly simplified, non-technical analysis, cellular function can be broken into the following components: Information and instructions for execution are stored as DNA in the cell, RNA acts as a source for distinctly encoded input, processed by ribosomes and other transcription factors to access and process the DNA and to output a protein. Bray's argument in favor of viewing cells and cellular structures as models of natural computational devices is important when considering the more applied theories of wetware to biorobotics. === Biorobotics === Wetware and biorobotics are closely related concepts, which both borrow from similar overall principles. A biorobotic structure can be defined as a system modeled from a preexisting organic complex or model such as cells (neurons) or more complex structures like organs (brain) or whole organisms. Unlike wetware, the concept of biorobotics is not always a system composed of organic molecules, but instead could be composed of conventional material which is designed and assembled in a structure similar or derived from a biological model. Biorobotics have many applications and are used to address the challenges of conventional computer architecture. Conceptually, designing a program, robot, or computational device after a preexisting biological model such as a cell, or even a whole organism, provides the engineer or programmer the benefits of incorporating into the structure the evolutionary advantages of the model. == Effects on users == Wetware technologies such as BCIs and neuromorphic chips offer new possibilities for user autonomy. For those with disabilities, such systems could restore motor or sensory functions and enhance quality of life. However, these technologies raise ethical questions: cognitive privacy, consent over biological data, and risk of exploitation. Without proper oversight, wetware technologies may also widen inequality, favoring those with access to cognitive enhancements. Open governance frameworks and ethical AI design grounded in neuro ethics will be essential. With the development of wetware devices, disparities in access could exacerbate social inequalities, benefiting those who have resources to enhance cognitive or physical abilities. It is necessary to create strong ethical frameworks, inclusive development practices, and open systems of governance to reduce risks and make sure that wetware advances are beneficial to all segments of society. == Applications and goals == === Basic neurocomputer composed of leech neurons === In 1999 William Ditto and his team of researchers at Georgia Institute of Technology and Emory University created a basic form of a wetware computer capable of simple addition by harnessing leech neurons. Leeches were used as a model organism due to the large size of their neuron, and the ease associated with their collection and manipulation. However, these results have never been published in a peer-reviewed journal, prompting questions about the validity of the claims. The computer was able to complete basic addition through electrical probes

  Read more →
• 

  Open Data-Link Interface

  The Open Data-Link Interface (ODI) is an application programming interface (API) for network interface controllers (NICs) developed by Apple and Novell. The API serves the same function as Microsoft and 3COM's Network Driver Interface Specification (NDIS). Originally, ODI was written for NetWare and Macintosh environments. Like NDIS, ODI provides rules that establish a vendor-neutral interface between the protocol stack and the adapter driver. It resides in Layer 2, the Data Link layer, of the OSI model. This interface also enables one or more network drivers to support one or more protocol stacks.

  Read more →
• 

  Social media mining

  Social media mining is the process of obtaining data from user-generated content on social media in order to extract actionable patterns, form conclusions about users, and act upon the information. Mining supports targeting advertising to users or academic research. The term is an analogy to the process of mining for minerals. Mining companies sift through raw ore to find the valuable minerals; likewise, social media mining sifts through social media data in order to discern patterns and trends about matters such as social media usage, online behaviour, content sharing, connections between individuals, buying behaviour. These patterns and trends are of interest to companies, governments and not-for-profit organizations, as such organizations can use the analyses for tasks such as design strategies, introduce programs, products, processes or services. Social media mining uses concepts from computer science, data mining, machine learning, and statistics. Mining is based on social network analysis, network science, sociology, ethnography, optimization and mathematics. It attempts to formally represent, measure and model patterns from social media data. In the 2010s, major corporations, governments and not-for-profit organizations began mining to learn about customers, clients and others. Platforms such as Google, Facebook (partnered with Datalogix and BlueKai) conduct mining to target users with advertising. Scientists and machine learning researchers extract insights and design product features. Users may not understand how platforms use their data. Users tend to click through Terms of Use agreements without reading them, leading to ethical questions about whether platforms adequately protect users' privacy. During the 2016 United States presidential election, Facebook allowed Cambridge Analytica, a political consulting firm linked to the Trump campaign, to analyze the data of an estimated 87 million Facebook users to profile voters, creating controversy when this was revealed. == Background == As defined by Kaplan and Haenlein, social media is the "group of internet-based applications that build on the ideological and technological foundations of Web 2.0, and that allow the creation and exchange of user-generated content." There are many categories of social media including, but not limited to, social networking (Facebook or LinkedIn), microblogging (Twitter), photo sharing (Flickr, Instagram, Photobucket, or Picasa), news aggregation (Google Reader, StumbleUpon, or Feedburner), video sharing (YouTube, MetaCafe), livecasting (Ustream or Twitch), virtual worlds (Kaneva), social gaming (World of Warcraft), social search (Google, Bing, or Ask.com), and instant messaging (Google Talk, Skype, or Yahoo! messenger). The first social media website was introduced by GeoCities in 1994. It enabled users to create their own homepages without having a sophisticated knowledge of HTML coding. The first social networking site, SixDegrees.com, was introduced in 1997. Since then, many other social media sites have been introduced, each providing service to millions of people. These individuals form a virtual world in which individuals (social atoms), entities (content, sites, etc.) and interactions (between individuals, between entities, between individuals and entities) coexist. Social norms and human behavior govern this virtual world. By understanding these social norms and models of human behavior and combining them with the observations and measurements of this virtual world, one can systematically analyze and mine social media. Social media mining is the process of representing, analyzing, and extracting meaningful patterns from data in social media, resulting from social interactions. It is an interdisciplinary field encompassing techniques from computer science, data mining, machine learning, social network analysis, network science, sociology, ethnography, statistics, optimization, and mathematics. Social media mining faces grand challenges such as the big data paradox, obtaining sufficient samples, the noise removal fallacy, and evaluation dilemma. Social media mining represents the virtual world of social media in a computable way, measures it, and designs models that can help us understand its interactions. In addition, social media mining provides necessary tools to mine this world for interesting patterns, analyze information diffusion, study influence and homophily, provide effective recommendations, and analyze novel social behavior in social media. == Uses == Social media mining is used across several industries including business development, social science research, health services, and educational purposes. Once the data received goes through social media analytics, it can then be applied to these various fields. Often, companies use the patterns of connectivity that pervade social networks, such as assortativity—the social similarity between users that are induced by influence, homophily, and reciprocity and transitivity. These forces are then measured via statistical analysis of the nodes and connections between these nodes. Social analytics also uses sentiment analysis, because social media users often relay positive or negative sentiment in their posts. This provides important social information about users' emotions on specific topics. These three patterns have several uses beyond pure analysis. For example, influence can be used to determine the most influential user in a particular network. Companies would be interested in this information in order to decide who they may hire for influencer marketing. These influencers are determined by recognition, activity generation, and novelty—three requirements that can be measured through the data mined from these sites. Analysts also value measures of homophily: the tendency of two similar individuals to become friends. Users have begun to rely on information of other users' opinions in order to understand diverse subject matter. These analyses can also help create recommendations for individuals in a tailored capacity. By measuring influence and homophily, online and offline companies are able to suggest specific products for individuals consumers, and groups of consumers. Social media networks can use this information themselves to suggest to their users possible friends to add, pages to follow, and accounts to interact with. == Perception == Modern social media mining is a controversial practice that has led to exponential gains in user growth for tech giants such as Facebook, Inc., Twitter, and Google. Companies such as these, considered "Big Tech" are companies that build algorithms that take advantage of user input to understand their preferences, and keep them on the platform as much as possible. These inputs, that can be as simple as time spent on a given screen, provide the data being mined, and lead to companies profiting heavily from using that data to capitalize on extremely accurate predictions about user behavior. The growth of platforms accelerated rapidly once these strategies were put in place; Most of the largest platforms now average over 1 billion active users per month as of 2021. It has been claimed by a multitude of anti-algorithm personalities, like Tristan Harris or Chamath Palihapitiya, that certain companies (specifically Facebook) valued growth above all else, and ignored potential negative impacts from these growth engineering tactics. At the same time, users have now created their own data arbitrages with the help of their own data, through content monetization and becoming influencers. Users typically have access to a varied set of analytics specific to people that interact with them on social media, and can use these as building blocks for their own targeting and growth strategies through ads and posts that cater to their audiences. Influencers also commonly promote products and services for established brands, creating one of the largest digital industries: Influencer marketing. Instagram, Facebook, Twitter, YouTube, Google, and others have long given access to platform analytics, and allowed third parties to access that information as well, at times unbeknownst to even the user whose data is being viewed/bought. == Research == === Research areas === Social media event detection – Social networks enable users to freely communicate with each other and share their recent news, ongoing activities or views about different topics. As a result, they can be seen as a potentially viable source of information to understand the current emerging topics/events. Public health monitoring and surveillance - Using large-scale analysis of social media to study large cohorts of patients and the general public, e.g. to obtain early warning signals of drug-drug interactions and adverse drug reactions, or understand human reproduction and sexual interest. Community structure (Community Detection/Evolution/Evaluation) – Identifying communities on social networks, how t

  Read more →
• 

  Data dictionary

  A data dictionary, or metadata repository, as defined in the IBM Dictionary of Computing, is a "centralized repository of information about data such as meaning, relationships to other data, origin, usage, and format". Oracle defines it as a collection of tables with metadata. The term can have one of several closely related meanings pertaining to databases and database management systems (DBMS): A document describing a database or collection of databases An integral component of a DBMS that is required to determine its structure A piece of middleware that extends or supplants the native data dictionary of a DBMS == Documentation == The terms data dictionary and data repository indicate a more general software utility than a catalogue. A catalogue is closely coupled with the DBMS software. It provides the information stored in it to the user and the DBA, but it is mainly accessed by the various software modules of the DBMS itself, such as DDL and DML compilers, the query optimiser, the transaction processor, report generators, and the constraint enforcer. On the other hand, a data dictionary is a data structure that stores metadata, i.e., (structured) data about information. The software package for a stand-alone data dictionary or data repository may interact with the software modules of the DBMS, but it is mainly used by the designers, users and administrators of a computer system for information resource management. These systems maintain information on system hardware and software configuration, documentation, application and users as well as other information relevant to system administration. If a data dictionary system is used only by the designers, users, and administrators and not by the DBMS Software, it is called a passive data dictionary. Otherwise, it is called an active data dictionary or data dictionary. When a passive data dictionary is updated, it is done so manually and independently from any changes to a DBMS (database) structure. With an active data dictionary, the dictionary is updated first and changes occur in the DBMS automatically as a result. Database users and application developers can benefit from an authoritative data dictionary document that catalogs the organization, contents, and conventions of one or more databases. This typically includes the names and descriptions of various tables (records or entities) and their contents (fields), plus additional details, like the type and length of each data element. Another important piece of information that a data dictionary can provide is the relationship between tables. This is sometimes referred to in entity-relationship diagrams (ERDs), or if using set descriptors, identifying which sets database tables participate in. In an active data dictionary constraints may be placed upon the underlying data. For instance, a range may be imposed on the value of numeric data in a data element (field), or a record in a table may be forced to participate in a set relationship with another record-type. Additionally, a distributed DBMS may have certain location specifics described within its active data dictionary (e.g. where tables are physically located). The data dictionary consists of record types (tables) created in the database by systems generated command files, tailored for each supported back-end DBMS. Oracle has a list of specific views for the "sys" user. This allows users to look up the exact information that is needed. Command files contain SQL Statements for CREATE TABLE, CREATE UNIQUE INDEX, ALTER TABLE (for referential integrity), etc., using the specific statement required by that type of database. There is no universal standard as to the level of detail in such a document. == Middleware == In the construction of database applications, it can be useful to introduce an additional layer of data dictionary software, i.e. middleware, which communicates with the underlying DBMS data dictionary. Such a "high-level" data dictionary may offer additional features and a degree of flexibility that goes beyond the limitations of the native "low-level" data dictionary, whose primary purpose is to support the basic functions of the DBMS, not the requirements of a typical application. For example, a high-level data dictionary can provide alternative entity-relationship models tailored to suit different applications that share a common database. Extensions to the data dictionary also can assist in query optimization against distributed databases. Additionally, DBA functions are often automated using restructuring tools that are tightly coupled to an active data dictionary. Software frameworks aimed at rapid application development sometimes include high-level data dictionary facilities, which can substantially reduce the amount of programming required to build menus, forms, reports, and other components of a database application, including the database itself. For example, PHPLens includes a PHP class library to automate the creation of tables, indexes, and foreign key constraints portably for multiple databases. Another PHP-based data dictionary, part of the RADICORE toolkit, automatically generates program objects, scripts, and SQL code for menus and forms with data validation and complex joins. For the ASP.NET environment, Base One's data dictionary provides cross-DBMS facilities for automated database creation, data validation, performance enhancement (caching and index utilization), application security, and extended data types. Visual DataFlex features provides the ability to use DataDictionaries as class files to form middle layer between the user interface and the underlying database. The intent is to create standardized rules to maintain data integrity and enforce business rules throughout one or more related applications. Some industries use generalized data dictionaries as technical standards to ensure interoperability between systems. The real estate industry, for example, abides by a RESO's Data Dictionary to which the National Association of REALTORS mandates its MLSs comply with through its policy handbook. This intermediate mapping layer for MLSs' native databases is supported by software companies which provide API services to MLS organizations. == Platform-specific examples == Developers use a data description specification (DDS) to describe data attributes in file descriptions that are external to the application program that processes the data, in the context of an IBM i. The sys.ts$ table in Oracle stores information about every table in the database. It is part of the data dictionary that is created when the Oracle Database is created. Developers may also use DDS context from free and open-source software (FOSS) for structured and transactional queries in open environments. == Typical attributes == Here is a non-exhaustive list of typical items found in a data dictionary for columns or fields: Entity or form name or their ID (EntityID or FormID). The group this field belongs to. Field name, such as RDBMS field name Displayed field title. May default to field name if blank. Field type (string, integer, date, etc.) Measures such as min and max values, display width, or number of decimal places. Different field types may interpret this differently. An alternative is to have different attributes depending on field type. Field display order or tab order Coordinates on screen (if a positional or grid-based UI) Default value Prompt type, such as drop-down list, combo-box, check-boxes, range, etc. Is-required (Boolean) - If 'true', the value cannot be blank, null, or only white-spaces Is-read-only (Boolean) Reference table name, if a foreign key. Can be used for validation or selection lists. Various event handlers or references to. Example: "on-click", "on-validate", etc. See event-driven programming. Format code, such as a regular expression or COBOL-style "PIC" statements Description or synopsis Database index characteristics or specification

  Read more →
• 

  Environmental impact of AI

  The environmental impact of the design, training, deployment and use of artificial intelligence includes the greenhouse gas emissions from generating electricity for data centres and computing hardware, operational and upstream water use, and material impacts from hardware manufacturing, mining and electronic waste. Estimating AI's environmental effects can be difficult because results depend on how impacts are measured, including whether accounting includes only model computation or also data-centre overhead, idle capacity, hardware manufacture, and local electricity supply. As these issues have received greater attention, governments and regulators have increasingly considered data-centre reporting requirements, energy-efficiency standards, and broader transparency measures for AI-related resource use. == Carbon footprint and energy use == AI-related energy use arises at multiple stages, including model training, fine-tuning, inference, storage, networking, and supporting infrastructure such as cooling and power conversion. === Individual level === Published estimates of energy use per AI request vary widely across models, tasks and measurement methods. A benchmark study presented at the 2024 ACM Conference on Fairness, Accountability, and Transparency found substantial differences between task types, with lower energy use for some text tasks and much higher energy use for image generation in the study's test conditions. In that benchmark, simple classification tasks consumed about 0.002–0.007 Wh per prompt on average (about 9% of a smartphone charge for 1,000 prompts), while text generation and text summarisation each used about 0.05 Wh per prompt; image generation averaged 2.91 Wh per prompt, and the least efficient image model in the study used 11.49 Wh per image (roughly equivalent to half a smartphone charge). First-party measurements in production environments have also been published. A 2025 Google study on Gemini assistant serving reported median per-prompt energy, emissions, and water-use estimates under the authors' accounting framework, while noting that different system boundaries can produce substantially different results. The study reported a median text-prompt estimate of about 0.24 Wh, which is roughly as much energy as watching nine seconds of television. The study also stated that software and infrastructure improvements reduced energy use by a factor of 33 and carbon emissions by a factor of 44 for a typical prompt over one year within the authors' framework. Researchers at the University of Michigan measured the energy consumption of various Meta Llama 3.1 models released in 2024 and found that smaller language models (8 billion parameters) use about 114 joules (0.03167 Wh) per response, while larger models (405 billion parameters) require up to 6,700 joules (1.861 Wh) per response. This corresponds to the energy needed to run a microwave oven for roughly one-tenth of a second and eight seconds, respectively. Comparisons between AI systems and human labour for specific tasks have produced mixed results and remain sensitive to assumptions about output quality, workload and system boundaries. A 2024 study in Scientific Reports reported 130 to 2900 times lower estimated carbon emissions for selected AI systems than for human writers and illustrators under its assumptions. A later Scientific Reports paper reported a counterexample for programming tasks under its assumptions, finding 5 to 19 times higher estimated emissions for the evaluated AI system than for human programmers on the benchmark used in that study. === System level === ==== Energy use and efficiency ==== AI electricity intensity depends not only on model architecture but also on hardware and facility efficiency. Data-centre operators commonly report Power usage effectiveness (PUE), which measures the ratio of total facility energy to IT equipment energy; a lower PUE indicates less overhead energy for cooling and other supporting infrastructure. Operators may also publish metrics and case studies on hardware efficiency, cooling systems and power sourcing. In its 2024 environmental report, Google stated that its 2023 total greenhouse gas emissions increased 13% year over year, primarily because of increased data-centre energy consumption and supply-chain emissions, while also reporting lower PUE than industry averages for its own facilities. The International Energy Agency has also reported that data centres remain a relatively small share of global electricity use overall, but that their local effects can be much more pronounced because demand is geographically concentrated. ==== Carbon footprint ==== At system level, AI contributes to rising electricity demand in data centres and related infrastructure. The International Energy Agency estimated that data centres used about 415 TWh of electricity in 2024, or around 1.5% of global electricity consumption, and projected that data-centre electricity use could rise to about 945 TWh by 2030, with AI identified as the main driver of that growth alongside other digital services. The carbon footprint of AI systems depends strongly on electricity sources, hardware efficiency, utilisation rates, and what stages are included in the accounting. Training large models can require substantial electricity, while total lifecycle impacts also depend on deployment scale and the amount of inference performed after training. Early analyses of frontier-model development reported rapid historical growth in training compute for selected systems, although later trends have depended on changes in model design, hardware and efficiency gains. Accounting methods that include upstream or embodied impacts, such as hardware manufacture and facilities construction, can materially affect estimates of AI-related emissions. === Decisions and strategies by individual companies === Large technology companies have reported that the expansion of AI and cloud infrastructure affects their sustainability targets, electricity demand, and resource use. Google, for example, attributed part of its emissions growth in 2023 to increased data-centre energy consumption and supply-chain emissions in its 2024 environmental report. Cloud and AI companies have also announced measures intended to reduce environmental impacts, including investment in more efficient hardware, low-carbon electricity procurement, alternative cooling systems, and water stewardship programmes. The extent, comparability, and third-party verification of such disclosures vary between firms and jurisdictions. == Water usage == Data centres can use water directly for cooling and indirectly through the water used in electricity generation, depending on the local energy mix. Public reporting on data-centre water use has often been inconsistent, making comparisons between operators and regions difficult. To standardise operational reporting, The Green Grid proposed the metric water usage effectiveness (WUE), defined as annual site water use divided by IT equipment energy use. WUE does not by itself measure local water stress, source sustainability, or all upstream water impacts. Studies of AI water use also distinguish between water withdrawal and water consumption. Research on AI-specific water use has argued that the water footprint of AI systems can be difficult to observe and may vary substantially by location, cooling design, and electricity source. A 2025 Communications of the ACM article summarised methods for estimating AI water footprints and emphasised the distinction between water withdrawal and water consumption. Li and colleagues estimated that global AI water withdrawal could reach 4.2–6.6 billion cubic metres in 2027 under the scenarios examined in their article. Using GPT-3, released by OpenAI in 2020, as an example, they estimated that training the model in Microsoft's U.S. data centres could consume about 700,000 litres of onsite water and about 5.4 million litres in total when offsite electricity-related water use was included; they also estimated that 10–50 medium-length GPT-3 responses could consume about 500 mL of water, depending on when and where the model was deployed. Published prompt-level estimates have also varied by system and accounting framework: the 2025 Google study on Gemini assistant serving reported a median text-prompt estimate of about 0.26 mL under its framework. Location can materially affect the significance of data-centre water use. Research on U.S. data centres found that one-fifth of servers' direct water footprint came from moderately to highly water-stressed watersheds, while nearly half of servers were fully or partially powered by plants located in water-stressed regions. A 2025 Reuters report, citing data from Verisk Maplecroft and NatureFinance, said that an average mid-sized data centre uses about 1.4 million litres of water per day for cooling and that Phoenix would experience a 32% increase in annual water stress if currently pl

  Read more →
• 

  Communications security

  Communications security is the discipline of preventing unauthorized interceptors from accessing telecommunications in an intelligible form, while still delivering content to the intended recipients. In the North Atlantic Treaty Organization culture, including United States Department of Defense culture, it is often referred to by the abbreviation COMSEC. The field includes cryptographic security, transmission security, emissions security and physical security of COMSEC equipment and associated keying material. COMSEC is used to protect both classified and unclassified traffic on military communications networks, including voice, video, and data. It is used for both analog and digital applications, and both wired and wireless links. Voice over secure internet protocol VOSIP has become the de facto standard for securing voice communication, replacing the need for Secure Terminal Equipment (STE) in much of NATO, including the U.S.A. USCENTCOM moved entirely to VOSIP in 2008. == Specialties == Cryptographic security: The component of communications security that results from the provision of technically sound cryptosystems and their proper use. This includes ensuring message confidentiality and authenticity. Emission security (EMSEC): The protection resulting from all measures taken to deny unauthorized persons information of value that might be derived from communications systems and cryptographic equipment intercepts and the interception and analysis of compromising emanations from cryptographic equipment, information systems, and telecommunications systems. Transmission security (TRANSEC): The component of communications security that results from the application of measures designed to protect transmissions from interception and exploitation by means other than cryptanalysis (e.g. frequency hopping and spread spectrum). Physical security: The component of communications security that results from all physical measures necessary to safeguard classified equipment, material, and documents from access thereto or observation thereof by unauthorized persons. == Related terms == ACES – Automated Communications Engineering Software AEK – Algorithmic Encryption Key AKMS – the Army Key Management System CCI – Controlled Cryptographic Item - equipment which contains COMSEC embedded devices CT3 – Common Tier 3 DTD – Data Transfer Device ICOM – Integrated COMSEC, e.g. a radio with built in encryption KEK – Key Encryption Key KG-30 – family of COMSEC equipment KOI-18 – Tape Reader General Purpose KPK – Key production key KYK-13 – Electronic Transfer Device KYX-15 – Electronic Transfer Device LCMS – Local COMSEC Management Software OTAR – Over the Air Rekeying OWK – Over the Wire Key SKL – Simple Key Loader SOI – Signal operating instructions STE – Secure Terminal Equipment (secure phone) STU-III – (obsolete secure phone, replaced by STE) TED – Trunk Encryption Device such as the WALBURN/KG family TEK – Traffic Encryption Key TPI – Two person integrity TSEC – Telecommunications Security (sometimes referred to in error transmission security or TRANSEC) Types of COMSEC equipment: Authentication equipment Crypto equipment: Any equipment that embodies cryptographic logic or performs one or more cryptographic functions (key generation, encryption, and authentication). Crypto-ancillary equipment: Equipment designed specifically to facilitate efficient or reliable operation of crypto-equipment, without performing cryptographic functions itself. Crypto-production equipment: Equipment used to produce or load keying material == DoD Electronic Key Management System == The Electronic Key Management System (EKMS) is a United States Department of Defense (DoD) key management, COMSEC material distribution, and logistics support system. The National Security Agency (NSA) established the EKMS program to supply electronic key to COMSEC devices in securely and timely manner, and to provide COMSEC managers with an automated system capable of ordering, generation, production, distribution, storage, security accounting, and access control. The Army's platform in the four-tiered EKMS, AKMS, automates frequency management and COMSEC management operations. It eliminates paper keying material, hardcopy Signal operating instructions (SOI) and saves the time and resources required for courier distribution. It has 4 components: LCMS provides automation for the detailed accounting required for every COMSEC account, and electronic key generation and distribution capability. ACES is the frequency management portion of AKMS. ACES has been designated by the Military Communications Electronics Board as the joint standard for use by all services in development of frequency management and crypto-net planning. CT3 with DTD software is in a fielded, ruggedized hand-held device that handles, views, stores, and loads SOI, Key, and electronic protection data. DTD provides an improved net-control device to automate crypto-net control operations for communications networks employing electronically keyed COMSEC equipment. SKL is a hand-held PDA that handles, views, stores, and loads SOI, Key, and electronic protection data. == Key Management Infrastructure (KMI) Program == KMI is intended to replace the legacy Electronic Key Management System to provide a means for securely ordering, generating, producing, distributing, managing, and auditing cryptographic products (e.g., asymmetric keys, symmetric keys, manual cryptographic systems, and cryptographic applications). This system is currently being fielded by Major Commands and variants will be required for non-DoD Agencies with a COMSEC Mission.

  Read more →
• 

  Cryptographic nonce

  In cryptography, a nonce is an arbitrary number that can be used just once in a cryptographic communication. It is often a random or pseudo-random number issued in an authentication protocol to ensure that each communication session is unique, and therefore that old communications cannot be reused in replay attacks. Nonces can also be useful as initialization vectors and in cryptographic hash functions. == Definition == A nonce is an arbitrary number used only once in a cryptographic communication, in the spirit of a nonce word. They are often random or pseudo-random numbers. Many nonces also include a timestamp to ensure exact timeliness, though this requires clock synchronisation between organisations. The addition of a client nonce ("cnonce") helps to improve the security in some ways as implemented in digest access authentication. To ensure that a nonce is used only once, it should be time-variant (including a suitably fine-grained timestamp in its value), or generated with enough random bits to ensure an insignificantly low chance of repeating a previously generated value. Some authors define pseudo-randomness (or unpredictability) as a requirement for a nonce. Nonce is a word dating back to Middle English for something only used once or temporarily (often with the construction "for the nonce"). It descends from the construction "then anes" ("the one [purpose]"). A false etymology claiming it to stand for "number used once" or similar is incorrect. == Usage == === Authentication === Authentication protocols may use nonces to ensure that old communications cannot be reused in replay attacks. For instance, nonces are used in HTTP digest access authentication to calculate an MD5 digest of the password. The nonces are different each time the 401 authentication challenge response code is presented, thus making replay attacks virtually impossible. The scenario of ordering products over the Internet can provide an example of the usefulness of nonces in replay attacks. An attacker could take the encrypted information and—without needing to decrypt—could continue to send a particular order to the supplier, thereby ordering products over and over again under the same name and purchase information. The nonce is used to give 'originality' to a given message so that if the company receives any other orders from the same person with the same nonce, it will discard those as invalid orders. A nonce may be used to ensure security for a stream cipher. Where the same key is used for more than one message and then a different nonce is used to ensure that the keystream is different for different messages encrypted with that key; often the message number is used. Secret nonce values are used by the Lamport signature scheme as a signer-side secret which can be selectively revealed for comparison to public hashes for signature creation and verification. === Hashing === Nonces are used in proof-of-work systems to vary the input to a cryptographic hash function so as to obtain a hash for a certain input that fulfils certain arbitrary conditions. In doing so, it becomes far more difficult to create a "desirable" hash than to verify it, shifting the burden of work onto one side of a transaction or system. For example, proof of work, using hash functions, was considered as a means to combat email spam by forcing email senders to find a hash value for the email (which included a timestamp to prevent pre-computation of useful hashes for later use) that had an arbitrary number of leading zeroes, by hashing the same input with a large number of values until a "desirable" hash was obtained. Similarly, the Bitcoin blockchain hashing algorithm can be tuned to an arbitrary difficulty by changing the required minimum/maximum value of the hash so that the number of bitcoins awarded for new blocks does not increase linearly with increased network computation power as new users join. This is likewise achieved by forcing Bitcoin miners to add nonce values to the value being hashed to change the hash algorithm output. As cryptographic hash algorithms cannot easily be predicted based on their inputs, this makes the act of blockchain hashing and the possibility of being awarded bitcoins something of a lottery, where the first "miner" to find a nonce that delivers a desirable hash is awarded bitcoins.

  Read more →