AI Code Meme

AI Code Meme — independent reviews, comparisons, pricing and step-by-step guides on Aizhi.

• 

  Test data management

  Test data management (TDM) is a process in software testing concerned with the creation, preparation, and control of data used for testing software systems. It involves supplying datasets required to execute test cases and verifying system behaviour under defined conditions. Test data management is an integral part of the software development lifecycle (SDLC) and is utilized in both manual and automated testing processes. It is applied in environments that use continuous integration and DevOps practices, where test execution requires consistent and repeatable data conditions. == Overview == Test data management includes the generation, selection, and preparation of data for testing purposes, as well as its distribution across test environments. It also involves controlling data versions and ensuring that datasets correspond to specific test scenarios. In many cases, production data is adapted for testing through techniques such as masking or subsetting to reduce size and remove sensitive content. Test data management ensures that test cases are executed with relevant, consistent, and readily available data. This reduces variability in test results and supports reproducibility across test cycles. == Importance == The role of test data management has expanded with the growth of complex, data-driven systems and regulatory requirements governing data usage. Testing often depends on data that reflects real-world conditions, but direct use of production data may introduce security and privacy risks. As a result, organizations apply methods such as data masking and anonymization to meet compliance requirements, including those set by the California Privacy Rights Act (CPRA) and Europe’s General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR). Inadequate control of test data can lead to incomplete test coverage, unreliable test results, or delays in testing processes due to unavailable or inconsistent datasets. == Techniques and tools == Test data management leverages various techniques for preparing and controlling data used in testing. These include the generation of synthetic data, the extraction of subsets from production datasets, and the modification of data to remove or obscure sensitive information. A key technical requirement in these processes is maintaining referential integrity, or ensuring that relationships between data entities remain consistent across different tables and systems after masking or subsetting. Data virtualization is also used to provide access to datasets without full replication. These methods may be implemented using software tools that automate data preparation, masking, and distribution.

  Read more →
• 

  GENESIS (software)

  GENESIS (The General Neural Simulation System) is a simulation environment for constructing realistic models of neurobiological systems at many levels of scale including: sub-cellular processes, individual neurons, networks of neurons, and neuronal systems. These simulations are “computer-based implementations of models whose primary objective is to capture what is known of the anatomical structure and physiological characteristics of the neural system of interest”. GENESIS is intended to quantify the physical framework of the nervous system in a way that allows for easy understanding of the physical structure of the nerves in question. “At present only GENESIS allows parallelized modeling of single neurons and networks on multiple-instruction-multiple-data parallel computers.” Development of GENESIS software spread from its home at Caltech to labs at the University of Texas at San Antonio, the University of Antwerp, the National Centre for Biological Sciences in Bangalore, the University of Colorado, the Pittsburgh Supercomputing Center, the San Diego Supercomputer Center, and Emory University. == Neurons and Neural Systems == GENESIS works by creating simulation environments for constructing models of neurons or neural systems. "Nerve cells are capable of communicating with each other in such a highly structured manner as to form neuronal networks. To understand neural networks, it is necessary to understand the ways in which one neuron communicates with another through synaptic connections and the process called synaptic transmission". Neurons have a specialized structure for their function, they "are different from most other cells in the body in that they are polarized and have distinct morphological regions, each with specific functions". The two important regions of a neuron are the dendrite and the axon. "Dendrites are the region where one neuron receives connections from other neurons. The cell body or soma contains the nucleus and the other organelles necessary for cellular function. The axon is a key component of nerve cells over which information is transmitted from one part of the neuron (e.g., the cell body) to the terminal regions of the neuron". The third important piece of a neuron is the synapse. "The synapse is the terminal region of the axon this is where one neuron forms a connection with another and conveys information through the process of synaptic transmission". Neural networks like the ones simulated with GENESIS software can quickly become highly complex and difficult to understand. "Just a few interconnected neurons (a microcircuit) can perform sophisticated tasks such as mediate reflexes, process sensory information, generate locomotion and mediate learning and memory. Even more complex networks, macrocircuits, consist of multiple embedded microcircuits. Macrocircuits mediate higher brain functions such as object recognition and cognition". GENESIS endeavors to simulate neural systems as they are found in nature. Often, "a neuron can receive contacts from up to 10,000 presynaptic neurons, and, in turn, any one neuron can contact up to 10,000 postsynaptic neurons. The combinatorial possibility could give rise to enormously complex neuronal circuits or network topologies, which might be very difficult to understand". == History == GENESIS was developed by Dr. James M. Bower, in the Caltech laboratory, and first released to the public in 1988 in association with the first Methods in Computational Neuroscience Course at the Marine Biological Laboratory in Woods Hole, MA. Full source code for the software was released in the same year under an open software model for development. It's now supported by the Computational Biology Initiative at the University of Texas at San Antonio and is available free along with tutorial guides on its use. P-GENESIS, a parallel version of GENESIS, was first run in 1990 on the Intel Delta, which was the prototype for the Intel Paragon family of massively parallel supercomputers. == How GENESIS Works == GENESIS is useful in creating a simulation environment for constructing models of neurobiological systems, such as: sub-cellular processes individual neurons networks of neurons neuronal systems The GENESIS system is complicated, but relatively easy to use. An individual can input commands through one of three ways: script files, graphical user interface, or the GENESIS command shell. These commands are then processed by the script language interpreter. "The Script Language Interpreter processes commands entered through the keyboard, script files, or the graphical user interface, and passes them to the GENESIS simulation engine. The simulation engine also loads compiled object libraries, reads and writes data files, and interacts with the graphical user interface". Below is a graphical representation of the user input process and a sample GENESIS output. == Applications == Most current applications for GENESIS involve realistic simulations of biological systems. It is usually used to simulate the behavior of larger brain structures, for example the cerebral cortex. These studies most often occur in lab courses in neural simulation at Caltech and the Marine Biological Laboratory at Woods Hole, Massachusetts. GENESIS can be used in combination with Yale University’s software called NEURON as a means for scientists to collaborate to construct a physical description of the nervous system. The GENESIS software can also be used with Kinetikit in the modeling of signal transduction pathways. GENESIS has been used in many studies. Some of these studies involve research that focuses on the development of software that would be useful across many disciplines. Others are studies of neurons, such as Purkinje cells. These studies used GENESIS to simulate Purkinje cells and could be useful for the planning and development of later experiments using the GENESIS software. There may also be biomedical applications of the software. For example, St. Jude Medical in Europe has developed an implanted GENESIS device.

  Read more →
• 

  Safe and Secure Innovation for Frontier Artificial Intelligence Models Act

  The Safe and Secure Innovation for Frontier Artificial Intelligence Models Act, or SB 1047, was a failed 2024 California bill intended to "mitigate the risk of catastrophic harms from AI models so advanced that they are not yet known to exist". Specifically, the bill would have applied to models which cost more than $100 million to train and were trained using a quantity of computing power greater than 1026 integer or floating-point operations. SB 1047 would have applied to all AI companies doing business in California—the location of the company would not matter. The bill would have created protections for whistleblowers and required developers to perform risk assessments of their models prior to release, with guidance from the Government Operations Agency. It would also have established CalCompute, a University of California public cloud computing cluster for startups, researchers and community groups. == Background == The rapid increase in capabilities of AI systems in the 2020s, including the release of ChatGPT in November 2022, caused some researchers and members of the public to become concerned about the existential risks associated with increasingly powerful AI systems. Hundreds of tech executives and AI researchers, including two of the so-called "Godfathers of AI", Geoffrey Hinton and Yoshua Bengio, signed a statement in May 2023 calling for the mitigation of the "risk of extinction from AI" to be a global priority alongside "pandemics and nuclear war". However, the plausibility of these risks is still widely debated. Strong regulation of AI has been criticized for purportedly causing regulatory capture by large AI companies like OpenAI, a phenomenon in which regulation advances the interest of larger companies at the expense of smaller competition and the public in general, although OpenAI ended up opposing the bill. Other advocates of AI regulation aim to prevent bias and privacy violations, rather than existential risks. For example, some experts who view existential concerns as overblown and unrealistic view them as a distraction from near-term harms of AI like discriminatory automated decision making. In the face of existential concerns, technology companies have made voluntary commitments to conduct safety testing, for example at the AI Safety Summit and AI Seoul Summit. In 2023, not long before the bill was proposed, Governor Newsom of California and President Biden issued executive orders on artificial intelligence. State Senator Wiener said SB 1047 draws heavily on the Biden executive order, and is motivated by the absence of unified federal legislation on AI safety. Historically, California has passed regulation on several tech issues itself, including consumer privacy and net neutrality, in the absence of action by Congress. == History == === Proposal and voting === The bill was authored by State Senator Scott Wiener. Wiener first proposed AI legislation for California through an intent bill called SB 294, the Safety in Artificial Intelligence Act, in September 2023. On February 7, 2024, Wiener introduced SB 1047. On May 21, SB 1047 passed the Senate 32–1. The bill was significantly amended by Wiener on August 15, 2024, in response to industry advice. Amendments included adding clarifications, and removing the creation of a "Frontier Model Division" and the penalty of perjury. On August 28, the bill passed the State Assembly 48–16. Then, due to the amendments, the bill was once again voted on by the Senate, passing 30–9. === Veto by governor === On September 29, Governor Gavin Newsom vetoed the bill. The deadline for California lawmakers to overrule Newsom's veto was November 30, 2024. Newsom cited concerns over the bill's regulatory framework targeting only large AI models based on their computational size, while not taking into account whether the models are deployed in high-risk environments. Newsom emphasized that this approach could create a false sense of security, overlooking smaller models that might present equally significant risks. He acknowledged the need for AI safety protocols but stressed the importance of adaptability in regulation as AI technology continues to evolve rapidly. Governor Newsom also committed to working with technology experts, federal partners, and research institutions, including the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace, led by former California Supreme Court Justice Mariano-Florentino Cuéllar; and Stanford University's Human-Centered AI (HAI) Institute, led by Dr. Fei-Fei Li. He announced plans to collaborate with these entities to advance responsible AI development, aiming to protect the public while fostering innovation. == Provisions == SB 1047 would have covered AI models with training compute over 1026 integer or floating-point operations and a cost of over $100 million. If a covered model is fine-tuned using more than $10 million, the resulting model would also have been covered. The bill would have defined critical harms with respect to four categories: Creation or use of a chemical, biological, radiological, or nuclear weapon Cyberattacks on critical infrastructure causing mass casualties or at least $500 million of damage Autonomous crimes causing mass casualties or at least $500 million of damage Other harms of comparable severity Developers would have needed to create a "safety and security protocol" before training covered models. Before deployment, they would have submitted a statement of compliance, confirming they took reasonable care to take measures to prevent covered models that pose an unreasonable risk of critical harms. The statement would have included risk assessments and descriptions of their compliance process. These rules would have applied to both covered models and their derivatives, including post-training modifications, with annual third-party audits required starting in 2026. Safeguards to reduce risk included the ability to shut down the model, which has been variously described as a "kill switch" and "circuit breaker". Whistleblowing provisions would have protected employees who report safety problems and incidents. Additionally, SB 1047 would have created a public cloud computing cluster called CalCompute, associated with the University of California, to support startups, researchers, and community groups that lack large-scale computing resources. === Compliance and supervision === SB 1047 would have required developers, beginning January 1, 2026, to annually retain a third-party auditor to perform an independent audit of compliance with the requirements of the bill, as provided. The Government Operations Agency would have reviewed the results of safety tests and incidents, and issue guidance, standards, and best practices. The bill would have created a Board of Frontier Models to supervise the application of the bill by the Government Operations Agency. It is would be composed of 9 members. == Reception == === Subjects of debate === Proponents of the bill described its provisions as simple and narrowly focused, with Sen. Scott Weiner describing it as a "light-touch, basic safety bill". This was disputed by critics of the bill, who described the bill's language as vague and criticized it as consolidating power in the largest AI companies at the expense of smaller ones. Proponents, in turn, argued that the bill only applies to models trained using more than 1026 FLOPS and with over $100 million, or fine-tuned with more than $10 million, and that the threshold could be increased if needed. The penalty of perjury was also a subject of debate, and was eventually removed through an amendment. The scope of the "kill switch" requirement was also reduced, following concerns from open-source developers. The use of the term "reasonable assurance" in the bill was also controversial, and it was eventually amended to "reasonable care". Critics then argued that "reasonable care" imposed an excessive burden by requiring confidence that models could not be used to cause catastrophic harm; proponents claimed that the standard did not require certainty and that it already applied to AI developers under existing law. === Support and opposition === Individual supporters of the bill included Turing Award recipients Yoshua Bengio and Geoffrey Hinton, Elon Musk, Bill de Blasio, Kevin Esvelt, Dan Hendrycks, Vitalik Buterin, OpenAI whistleblowers Daniel Kokotajlo and William Saunders, Lawrence Lessig, Sneha Revanur, Stuart Russell, Jan Leike, actors Mark Ruffalo, Sean Astin, and Rosie Perez, Scott Aaronson, and Max Tegmark. Over 120 Hollywood celebrities, including Mark Hamill, Jane Fonda, and J. J. Abrams, also signed a statement in support of the bill. Max Tegmark likened the bill's focus on holding companies responsible for the harms caused by their models to the FDA requiring clinical trials before a company can release a drug to the market. Organizations sponsoring the bill included the Center for AI Safety, Economic Security California and Encode. The la

  Read more →
• 

  Safe Superintelligence Inc.

  Safe Superintelligence Inc. (SSI Inc.) is an Israeli-American artificial intelligence company founded by Ilya Sutskever, the former chief scientist of OpenAI; Daniel Gross, former head of Apple’s AI efforts; and Daniel Levy, an investor and AI researcher. The company's mission is to focus on safely developing a superintelligence, a computer-based agent capable of surpassing human intelligence. == History == On May 15, 2024, OpenAI co-founder Ilya Sutskever left OpenAI after a board dispute where he voted to fire Sam Altman amid concerns about communication and trust. Sutskever and others additionally believed that OpenAI was neglecting its original focus on safety in favor of pursuing opportunities for commercialization. On June 19, 2024, Sutskever posted on X that he was starting SSI Inc, with the goal to safely develop superintelligent AI, alongside Daniel Levy, and Daniel Gross. The company, composed of a small team, is split between Palo Alto, California and Tel Aviv, Israel. In September 2024, SSI revealed it had raised $1 billion from venture capital firms including SV Angel, DST Global, Sequoia Capital, and Andreessen Horowitz. The money will be used to build up more computing power and hire top individuals in the field. In March 2025, SSI reached a $30 billion valuation in a funding round led by Greenoaks Capital. This is six times its previous $5 billion valuation from September 2024. Despite not yet generating revenue and having approximately 20 employees, the company has attracted significant investor interest, largely due to co-founder Ilya Sutskever's reputation and its focus on developing safe superintelligence. In April 2025, Google Cloud announced a partnership to provide TPUs for SSI's research. In the first half of 2025, Meta attempted to acquire SSI but was rebuffed by Sutskever. In July 2025, co-founder Gross left the company to join Meta Superintelligence Labs, and Sutskever became the CEO of SSI.

  Read more →
• 

  Doubao

  Doubao (Chinese: 豆包) is an artificial intelligence assistant developed by ByteDance. == History == The chatbot was launched in August 2023. By November 2024, it had become China's most popular AI chatbot, with approximately 60 million monthly active users according to industry analytics. == Design == Doubao is powered by Volcano Engine (Volcengine), 120 trillion tokens consumed per day. == Variants == === Dola === The international version of Doubao is Dola which was launched in August 2023 as Cici. Dola is powered by OpenAI's GPT series of large language models and by Google's Gemini.

  Read more →
• 

  Texas Senate Bill 20

  Texas Senate Bill 20 (S.B. 20), also known as the "Stopping AI-Generated Child Pornography Act", is a 2025 law in the state of Texas that creates new criminal offenses for those who possess, promote, or view visual material deemed obscene, which is said to depict a child, whether it is an actual person, animated or cartoon depiction, or an image of someone created through computer software or artificial intelligence. It was passed by the Texas Legislature on May 28, 2025, unanimously in both chambers. It was signed into law by Governor Greg Abbott on June 20, 2025. It went into effect on September 1, 2025. It was authored by Pete Flores and co-sponsored by Brent Hagenbuch, Juan Hinojosa, Joan Huffman, Phil King, and Tan Parker, as part of a package of legislation in the Texas House and Senate about A.I. and child pornography. Some supporters called it "common-sense" legislation falling within the "proper role" of government, protecting children and the "common good" within the state, with Heidi Ruiz, a police sergeant in Houston, describing the bill as "fantastic" and "fabulous." The bill drew comparisons to language, within Texas state legislation, which aimed to institute state-level book bans. Critics described the law as unconstitutional, saying it violated the Free Speech Clause of the First Amendment which prohibits abridgement of freedom of speech and the press, including the legal precedent set in Ashcroft v. Free Speech Coalition. The Comic Book Legal Defense Fund vowed to support those wrongly accused under the law. Much of the controversy regarding S.B. 20 involves the broad language pertaining to "obscene" pornographic images as including A.I.-created, animated, and cartoon depictions, with some critics arguing it could have a chilling effect on anime, manga, graphic novels, and other media produced, distributed, or created within Texas. == Provisions == S.B. 20 gives Texas police more provisions to restrict artificial intelligence-created child pornography, creating new criminal charge for possessing material depicting an underage person, under age 18, whether this child is an actual person or not. Those charged with this felony offense could go to state jail, but this could be elevated if the person charged has a prior conviction, of a $10,000 fine and two years in prison. == Reactions == === Support === Lieutenant Governor Dan Patrick applauded the unanimous passage of the law in the Texas Senate and called it "a priority" to protect children in Texas, and Texas citizens and thanked Pete Flores for his work on "this important issue". He later described the bill as part of the "bold, conservative agenda" that the Texas legislature passed during the 2025 legislative session. Phil King, one of the bill's co-sponsors, said that issue of child pornography had "infiltrated" the state's schools and said he was proud that the Texas legislature had "taken decisive action to protect our vulnerable Texans". Another co-sponsor of the legislation, Tan Parker described the law as "decisive action" to protect the children within Texas, and said he looked "forward to advancing this critical legislation" onward from the Texas Senate Criminal Justice Committee. He also described the legislation as "critical" action to protect the state's children from A.I.-generated child pornography and an "effective tool for law enforcement" to crack down on child porn perpetrators. Other supporters, such as police, and prosecutors, called the legislation an "important step" to ensure that images generated with A.I., along with deepfakes, "can't be shared with impunity" and necessary to ensure children's protection. Flores told senators that technology which enabled the production of "offensive" material by child predators had "no redeeming value whatsoever" and asserted that the materials had often been "used to groom and abuse children". John Leigh, a co-founder of Anime Matsuri, one of the largest conventions for anime within Texas, reassured those who contacted him, saying that the law is not targeted at anime and manga fans, stated that he supported the legislation, describing it as a step "in the right direction," and said that he did not believe it would "negatively impact" anime or related art in the state. Also, State Representative Dade Phelan emphasized the legislation's urgency to deal with A.I. and child pornography, adding that they need to "put some guardrails on it to where the public is being taken care of". The Texas Policy Research Foundation supported the legislation, saying that although it may lead to increased demands on state and local governmental resources, higher costs for local governments, and possible "civil liberty concerns" around online censorship, it represents a "necessary legal update" to address exploitation of children online, while "modernizing enforcement mechanisms" and recommended that lawmakers vote in favor of the law. Additionally, the group Texans for Fiscal Responsibility supported the law, arguing that it strengthened state law, upheld public safety, protected minors, and called it a "common-sense bill" protecting and promoting the "common good", children, and fell within the "proper role" of government. The Texas Public Policy Foundation also expressed their support for the law. A policy director for aforementioned conservative think tank, Zach Whiting, told the Texas Senate Committee on Criminal Justice, on March 4, 2025, that the foundation would assist legislators ans staff to "advance any and all measures to protect kids online" and shared an excerpt from of research paper about threats posed by A.I. in creating "sexually explicit deepfakes of children". === Opposition === Although the bill passed both chambers unanimously, there were some reports that the bill stalled due to opposition from Democratic lawmakers. Additionally, some individuals expressed concerns about the broad nature of the law's provisions. Anime Matsuri co-founder Deneice Leigh called for the law's wording to be clarified because "artists are anxious about displaying or selling fan art" even if the intention is "not be to penalize creators". She also described the bill as "vague and open to interpretation" as to what would be considered obscene and offensive while noting that the bill is not aiming to "target artists". Benjamin Napier, owner of Mansfield Comics and Manga in Mansfield, Texas, said that at first he felt the law was "ridiculous" and "kind of frivolous" at first, part of a "misguided puritanical onslaught", and noted that he would not cow "to the puritanical regime" if it was enacted. Kirsten Cather, an Asian Studies scholar at University of Texas, expressed concern at the law's misinterpretation because "many anime characters appear youthful, regardless of their actual age", said that the law could "stifle creative expression", and noted that the law's scope is broad enough to have manga and anime under scrutiny, a "real slippery slope here that's being breached". Marcel Green of Screen Rant said that the law's ambiguity led to concerns from manga and anime fans, and theorized that the law's application to a fan within Texas, who downloaded the 368th chapter of My Hero Academia, which has a "sexualized depiction" of an "underage high school student", would result in a criminal offense of "180 days to two years in state jail, along with a fine of up to $10,000". Green also said the law is problematic because many anime and manga characters are young, with many protagonists as minors and argued that the law could apply in limited cases, if state officials deemed an anime or manga under scrutiny as lacking "artistic value". Evan D. Mullicane, on the same site, said the vague wording of the legislation made it "dangerous" for anime such as Dragon Ball and Naruto, and could impact more than hentai, predicting it will be used against more than its "intended target" and be used to censor stories with "young LGBTQIA characters". Another critic on the same site, Carlyle Edmundson, called for anime fans to step up and prevent the law's enactment "for the good of artists and fans everywhere", saying that the legislation was "draconian" and claimed it was the most extreme case of anime and manga censorship in U.S. history. Nick Valdez of ComicBook.com said that the legislation could lead to censorship of "many anime and manga projects," like Kill la Kill and The 100 Girlfriends Who Really, Really, Really, Really, Really Love You, becoming a crime, and said that even if the law is enforced in a case-by-case basis, it could lead to a "much larger ban of materials in the state" itself due to the content of certain manga and anime. Vanessa Esguerra of The Mary Sue argued that possession of manga like Berserk and Vagabond, or viewing Dandadan, could be deemed illegal under the law, due to various parts of each of these media, and asserted that viewing and owning certain anime and other media, falling under the law's provisions,

  Read more →
• 

  Xinhua–Sogou AI news anchor

  Xinhua News Agency and Sogou of China developed an artificial intelligence (AI) for news reporting purposes. The AI was unveiled in 2018. It is touted to be the "world's first AI news anchor". == History == The AI was unveiled at the 2018 World Internet Conference in Wuzhen, Zhejiang, China. The AI devises avatars patterned after real life Xinhua anchors. The AI patterned after Qiu Hao spoke in Chinese, while the one derived from the likeness of Zhang Zhao speaks in English. The unveiling of the AI raised concerns of its impact on employment. Xinhua and Sogou unveiled Xin Xiaomeng, an AI with a female avatar in 2019. People's Daily followed suit by unveiling its own AI newscaster in 2023.

  Read more →
• 

  Thinking Machines Lab

  Thinking Machines Lab Inc. is an American artificial intelligence (AI) startup founded by Mira Murati, the former chief technology officer of OpenAI. The company was founded in February 2025, and by July had completed an early-stage funding round led by Andreessen Horowitz, raising $2 billion at a valuation of $12 billion overall from investors such as Nvidia, AMD, Cisco, and Jane Street. The company is based in San Francisco and structured as a public benefit corporation. == History == By its launch in February 2025, Thinking Machines Lab was reported to have hired about 30 researchers and engineers from competitors including OpenAI, Meta AI, and Mistral AI. Its founding team members include Barret Zoph, former OpenAI VP of Research (Post-Training), Lilian Weng, former OpenAI VP, and OpenAI cofounder John Schulman, who joined after a brief stint at the lab's competitor Anthropic. In January 2026, it was reported that Barret Zoph and Luke Metz, departed the startup to return to OpenAI. Other former OpenAI employees who have been hired include Jonathan Lachman and Andrew Tulloch (although Tulloch departed after getting recruited for Meta Superintelligence Labs). Thinking Machines Lab's advisers include Bob McGrew, previously OpenAI's chief research officer, and Alec Radford, who was a lead researcher for OpenAI. On October 1, 2025, it announced Tinker, an API for fine-tuning language models. Users would submit jobs through the API for fine-tuning one of the various open-weight models supported. The Lab would run the jobs on its internal clusters and training infrastructure. == Business structure == Thinking Machines Lab grants Mira Murati a deciding vote on board matters, weighted to provide her with a majority decision-making capability. Additionally, founding shareholders possess votes weighted 100 times greater than those of regular shareholders. In July 2025, Andreessen Horowitz was reported to have led the company's initial funding round, raising "about $2 billion at a valuation of $12 billion". The government of Albania (Murati's country of origin) was also included in this round, making a $10 million investment which required an amendment to the country's 2025 budget. == Partnership == In March 2026, Thinking Machines Lab announced a strategic partnership with NVIDIA involving an undisclosed investment and a multi-year agreement to deploy one gigawatt of Vera Rubin computing capacity.

  Read more →
• 

  Inception score

  The Inception Score (IS) is an algorithm used to assess the quality of images created by a generative image model such as a generative adversarial network (GAN). The score is calculated based on the output of a separate, pretrained Inception v3 image classification model applied to a sample of (typically around 30,000) images generated by the generative model. The Inception Score is maximized when the following conditions are true: The entropy of the distribution of labels predicted by the Inceptionv3 model for the generated images is minimized. In other words, the classification model confidently predicts a single label for each image. Intuitively, this corresponds to the desideratum of generated images being "sharp" or "distinct". The predictions of the classification model are evenly distributed across all possible labels. This corresponds to the desideratum that the output of the generative model is "diverse". It has been somewhat superseded by the related Fréchet inception distance. While the Inception Score only evaluates the distribution of generated images, the FID compares the distribution of generated images with the distribution of a set of real images ("ground truth"). == Definition == Let there be two spaces, the space of images Ω X {\displaystyle \Omega _{X}} and the space of labels Ω Y {\displaystyle \Omega _{Y}} . The space of labels is finite. Let p g e n {\displaystyle p_{gen}} be a probability distribution over Ω X {\displaystyle \Omega _{X}} that we wish to judge. Let a discriminator be a function of type p d i s : Ω X → M ( Ω Y ) {\displaystyle p_{dis}:\Omega _{X}\to M(\Omega _{Y})} where M ( Ω Y ) {\displaystyle M(\Omega _{Y})} is the set of all probability distributions on Ω Y {\displaystyle \Omega _{Y}} . For any image x {\displaystyle x} , and any label y {\displaystyle y} , let p d i s ( y | x ) {\displaystyle p_{dis}(y|x)} be the probability that image x {\displaystyle x} has label y {\displaystyle y} , according to the discriminator. It is usually implemented as an Inception-v3 network trained on ImageNet. The Inception Score of p g e n {\displaystyle p_{gen}} relative to p d i s {\displaystyle p_{dis}} is I S ( p g e n , p d i s ) := exp ⁡ ( E x ∼ p g e n [ D K L ( p d i s ( ⋅ | x ) ‖ ∫ p d i s ( ⋅ | x ) p g e n ( x ) d x ) ] ) {\displaystyle IS(p_{gen},p_{dis}):=\exp \left(\mathbb {E} _{x\sim p_{gen}}\left[D_{KL}\left(p_{dis}(\cdot |x)\|\int p_{dis}(\cdot |x)p_{gen}(x)dx\right)\right]\right)} Equivalent rewrites include ln ⁡ I S ( p g e n , p d i s ) := E x ∼ p g e n [ D K L ( p d i s ( ⋅ | x ) ‖ E x ∼ p g e n [ p d i s ( ⋅ | x ) ] ) ] {\displaystyle \ln IS(p_{gen},p_{dis}):=\mathbb {E} _{x\sim p_{gen}}\left[D_{KL}\left(p_{dis}(\cdot |x)\|\mathbb {E} _{x\sim p_{gen}}[p_{dis}(\cdot |x)]\right)\right]} ln ⁡ I S ( p g e n , p d i s ) := H [ E x ∼ p g e n [ p d i s ( ⋅ | x ) ] ] − E x ∼ p g e n [ H [ p d i s ( ⋅ | x ) ] ] {\displaystyle \ln IS(p_{gen},p_{dis}):=H[\mathbb {E} _{x\sim p_{gen}}[p_{dis}(\cdot |x)]]-\mathbb {E} _{x\sim p_{gen}}[H[p_{dis}(\cdot |x)]]} ln ⁡ I S {\displaystyle \ln IS} is nonnegative by Jensen's inequality. Pseudocode:INPUT discriminator p d i s {\displaystyle p_{dis}} . INPUT generator g {\displaystyle g} . Sample images x i {\displaystyle x_{i}} from generator. Compute p d i s ( ⋅ | x i ) {\displaystyle p_{dis}(\cdot |x_{i})} , the probability distribution over labels conditional on image x i {\displaystyle x_{i}} . Sum up the results to obtain p ^ {\displaystyle {\hat {p}}} , an empirical estimate of ∫ p d i s ( ⋅ | x ) p g e n ( x ) d x {\displaystyle \int p_{dis}(\cdot |x)p_{gen}(x)dx} . Sample more images x i {\displaystyle x_{i}} from generator, and for each, compute D K L ( p d i s ( ⋅ | x i ) ‖ p ^ ) {\displaystyle D_{KL}\left(p_{dis}(\cdot |x_{i})\|{\hat {p}}\right)} . Average the results, and take its exponential. RETURN the result. === Interpretation === A higher inception score is interpreted as "better", as it means that p g e n {\displaystyle p_{gen}} is a "sharp and distinct" collection of pictures. ln ⁡ I S ( p g e n , p d i s ) ∈ [ 0 , ln ⁡ N ] {\displaystyle \ln IS(p_{gen},p_{dis})\in [0,\ln N]} , where N {\displaystyle N} is the total number of possible labels. ln ⁡ I S ( p g e n , p d i s ) = 0 {\displaystyle \ln IS(p_{gen},p_{dis})=0} iff for almost all x ∼ p g e n {\displaystyle x\sim p_{gen}} p d i s ( ⋅ | x ) = ∫ p d i s ( ⋅ | x ) p g e n ( x ) d x {\displaystyle p_{dis}(\cdot |x)=\int p_{dis}(\cdot |x)p_{gen}(x)dx} That means p g e n {\displaystyle p_{gen}} is completely "indistinct". That is, for any image x {\displaystyle x} sampled from p g e n {\displaystyle p_{gen}} , discriminator returns exactly the same label predictions p d i s ( ⋅ | x ) {\displaystyle p_{dis}(\cdot |x)} . The highest inception score N {\displaystyle N} is achieved if and only if the two conditions are both true: For almost all x ∼ p g e n {\displaystyle x\sim p_{gen}} , the distribution p d i s ( y | x ) {\displaystyle p_{dis}(y|x)} is concentrated on one label. That is, H y [ p d i s ( y | x ) ] = 0 {\displaystyle H_{y}[p_{dis}(y|x)]=0} . That is, every image sampled from p g e n {\displaystyle p_{gen}} is exactly classified by the discriminator. For every label y {\displaystyle y} , the proportion of generated images labelled as y {\displaystyle y} is exactly E x ∼ p g e n [ p d i s ( y | x ) ] = 1 N {\displaystyle \mathbb {E} _{x\sim p_{gen}}[p_{dis}(y|x)]={\frac {1}{N}}} . That is, the generated images are equally distributed over all labels.

  Read more →
• 

  Interactive activation and competition networks

  Interactive activation and competition (IAC) networks are artificial neural networks used to model memory and intuitive generalizations. They are made up of nodes or artificial neurons which are arrayed and activated in ways that emulate the behaviors of human memory. The IAC model is used by the parallel distributed processing (PDP) Group and is associated with James L. McClelland and David E. Rumelhart; it is described in detail in their book Explorations in Parallel Distributed Processing: A Handbook of Models, Programs, and Exercises. This model does not contradict any currently known biological data or theories, and its performance is close enough to human performance as to warrant further investigation.

  Read more →
• 

  Minimum intelligent signal test

  The minimum intelligent signal test, or MIST, is a variation of the Turing test proposed by Chris McKinstry in which only boolean (yes/no or true/false) answers may be given to questions. The purpose of such a test is to provide a quantitative statistical measure of humanness, which may subsequently be used to optimize the performance of artificial intelligence systems intended to imitate human responses. McKinstry gathered approximately 80,000 propositions that could be answered yes or no, e.g.: Is Earth a planet? Was Abraham Lincoln once President of the United States? Is the sun bigger than my foot? Do people sometimes lie? He called these propositions Mindpixels. These questions test both specific knowledge of aspects of culture, and basic facts about the meaning of various words and concepts. It could therefore be compared with the SAT, intelligence testing and other controversial measures of mental ability. McKinstry's aim was not to distinguish between shades of intelligence but to identify whether a computer program could be considered intelligent at all. According to McKinstry, a program able to do much better than chance on a large number of MIST questions would be judged to have some level of intelligence and understanding. For example, on a 20-question test, if a program were guessing the answers at random, it could be expected to score 10 correct on average. But the probability of a program scoring 20 out of 20 correct by guesswork is only one in 220, i.e. one in 1,048,576; so if a program were able to sustain this level of performance over several independent trials, with no prior access to the propositions, it should be considered intelligent. == Discussion == McKinstry criticized existing approaches to artificial intelligence such as chatterbots, saying that his questions could "kill" AI programs by quickly exposing their weaknesses. He contrasted his approach, a series of direct questions assessing an AI's capabilities, to the Turing test and Loebner Prize method of engaging an AI in undirected typed conversation. Critics of the MIST have noted that it would be easy to "kill" a McKinstry-style AI too, due to the impossibility of supplying it with correct answers to all possible yes/no questions by ways of a finite set of human-generated Mindpixels: the fact that an AI can answer the question "Is the sun bigger than my foot?" correctly does not mean that it can answer variations like "Is the sun bigger than (my hand | my liver | an egg yolk | Alpha Centauri A | ...)" correctly, too. However, the late McKinstry might have replied that a truly intelligent, knowledgeable entity (on a par with humans) would be able to work out answers such as (yes | yes | yes | don't know | ...) by applying its knowledge of the relative sizes of the objects named. In other words, the MIST was intended as a test of AI, not as a suggestion for implementing AI. It can also be argued that the MIST is a more objective test of intelligence than the Turing test, a subjective assessment that some might consider to be more a measure of the interrogator's gullibility than of the machine's intelligence. According to this argument, a human's judgment of a Turing test is vulnerable to the ELIZA effect, a tendency to mistake superficial signs of intelligence for the real thing, anthropomorphizing the program. The response, suggested by Alan Turing's essay Computing Machinery and Intelligence, is that if a program is a convincing imitation of an intelligent being, it is in fact intelligent. The dispute is thus over what it means for a program to have "real" intelligence, and by what signs it can be detected. A similar debate exists in the controversy over great ape language, in which nonhuman primates are said to have learned some aspects of sign languages but the significance of this learning is disputed.

  Read more →
• 

  Logic Programming Associates

  Logic Programming Associates (LPA) is a company specializing in logic programming and artificial intelligence software. LPA was founded in 1980 and is widely known for its range of Prolog compilers, the Flex expert system toolkit and most recently, VisiRule. LPA was established to exploit research at the Department of Computing and Control at Imperial College London into logic programming carried out under the supervision of Prof Robert Kowalski. == History of LPA Prolog == One of the first Prolog implementations made available by LPA was micro-PROLOG which ran on popular 8-bit home computers such as the Sinclair ZX Spectrum and Apple II. The 8-bit micro-PROLOG interpreter was soon followed by micro-PROLOG Professional one of the first Prolog implementations for the IBM PC running MS-DOS. micro-PROLOG Professional could access all of the 640K memory available under MS-DOS and therefore manage much larger programs In 1985, LPA released LPA MacProlog which ran on the MacPlus and Mac II computers which could access up to 4 Mb memory. MacProlog was later licensed to Quintus for re-distribution in the USA. In 1989, LPA started work on a new 32-bit Prolog compiler which could use DOS-extender technology to access up to 4GB memory. This became the basis for LPA Prolog for Windows, aka WIN-PROLOG, which was then released for Windows 3.0 in 1990. LPA's core Prolog product is LPA Prolog for Windows, a compiler and development system for the Microsoft Windows platform. The current LPA software range comprises an integrated AI toolset which covers various aspects of Artificial Intelligence including Logic Programming, Expert Systems, Knowledge-based Systems, Data Mining, Agents and Case-based reasoning etc. As well as continuing with Prolog compiler technology development, LPA has a track record of creating innovative associated tools and products to address specific challenges and opportunities. == Flex Expert System toolkit == In 1989, in response to the rise of interest in Expert Systems and the emergence of products such as Crystal, GoldWorks, NExpert, LPA developed the Flex expert system toolkit, which incorporated frame-based reasoning with inheritance, rule-based programming and data-driven procedures. Flex has its own English-like Knowledge Specification Language (KSL) which means that knowledge and rules are defined in an easy-to-read and understand way. LPA supported Flex on Windows, DOS and Macintosh PCs, as an add-on toolkit to its various LPA Prolog systems and eanbled LPA to enter the then quick vibrant Expert Systems rules-market. Flex was quickly established as the leading Prolog-based expert system toolkit and was licensed to other Prolog providors on other hardware platforms including Telecomputing Plc to supplement Top One on IBM and ICL mainframes. Other implementations included Quintec-Flex, Quintus Flex, Poplog Flex and BIM Flex which were all running on Unix and/or Vax/VMS platforms. POPLOG-Flex was used to build BRAND EVALUATOR - an expert system to assist brand specialists in evaluating the worth of branded products Quintec-Flex was used to build a hybrid system for the non-linear dynamic analysis/design of coupled shear walls Flex was adopted by the Open University as part of its course T396, "Artificial intelligence for technology" which was designed by Prof Adrian Hopgood. Some of the teaching material is now available on his AI tookit website. Flex was also used by David A Ferrucci and Selmer Bringsjord in their storytelling machine, BRUTUS. == PVG == In 1992, LPA helped set up the Prolog Vendors Group, a not-for-profit organization whose aim was to help promote Prolog by making people aware of its usage in industry. == Business Integrity Ltd and Contract Express == Between 1996 and 1998, based on work co-funded through a DTI Smart award, LPA developed ScaffoldIT, a tool for building dynamic documents and intelligent web sites. This technology, built using the LPA Prolog engine and associated ProWeb Server, was able to generate complex, personalised documents such as insurance policy schedules, legal contracts, and complex sales proposals, over the Web. In 1999/2000, LPA helped set up Business Integrity Ltd, as a Joint Venture with Tarlo-Lyons, to bring the above document assembly technology to market. This product eventually became Contract Express. Contract Express became very popular amongst large law firms and was sold worldwide for both internal and external use. Partners and GCs liked Contract Express because lawyers were able to quickly and accurately automate and update their legal templates in Word without requiring IT specialists to convert them into programs. As a result of the commercial success of Contract Express, BIL was acquired by Thomson Reuters in 2015. The very early days of BIL are described by Clive Spenser here. == VisiRule == In 2004, LPA launched VisiRule a graphical tool for developing knowledge-based and decision support systems. VisiRule was described in IEEE Potentials in 2007 (see Drawing on your knowledge with VisiRule): VisiRule has been used in various sectors, to build legal expert systems, machine diagnostic programs, medical and financial advice systems, etc. In 2013, VisiRule was incorporated into Ecosystem Management Decision Support (EMDS) where it has been used to provide enhanced decision support capabilities. EMDS integrates state-of-the-art geographic information system (GIS) as well as logic programming and decision modeling technologies on multiple platforms (Windows, Linux, Mac OS X) to provide decision support for a substantial portion of the adaptive management process of ecosystem management. EMDS is actively used, extended, supported and maintained by Mountain View Business Group (for an in-depth reprise of EMDS see the article in Frontiers in Environmental Science). In 2023, VisiRule was listed as one of the 5 best decision support software for large enterprises in 2024. == Customers == For many years, LPA has worked closely with Valdis Krebs, an American-Latvian researcher, author, and consultant in the field of social and organizational network analysis. Valdis is the founder and chief scientist of Orgnet, and the creator of the popular Inflow software package. LPA Prolog and Flex were used to create Allergenius, an expert system for the interpretation of allergen microarray results. Rules representing the knowledge base (KB) were derived from the literature and specialized databases. The input data included the patient's ID and disease(s), the results of either a skin prick test or specific IgE assays and ISAC results. The output was a medical report.

  Read more →
• 

  AppBlock

  AppBlock is a software tool for managing screen time that limits access to selected mobile applications and websites. Developed by the Czech studio MobileSoft, it is distributed for Android and iOS devices as well as through browser extensions for Google Chrome, Microsoft Edge and Brave, and as desktop solutions. The application is used primarily to restrict time spent on social media and similar distracting services while working and studying. By 2025, the application reported 700,000 monthly active users, with the domestic Czech market accounting for less than one percent of its total user base and revenue. == History == === Origins === AppBlock was created by the Czech software studio MobileSoft, based in Hradec Králové. The studio was founded in 2012 by Miroslav Novosvětský, who remains the sole owner. The idea for the application arose from the use of browser-based website blockers on desktop computers. AppBlock was conceived as a way to reduce the time spent on mobile devices. === Early releases === In its early phase, AppBlock was available only for phones running on Android. Early versions allowed users to limit access to selected applications and websites during specified periods. From the outset, the application was distributed internationally rather than only within the Czech market, and early coverage reported a multi-million number of downloads worldwide. === Expansion of functionality === Over time, AppBlock has expanded beyond basic application blocking to include additional functions related to limiting procrastination and managing attention. The development of AppBlock accelerated during the COVID-19 pandemic. Following a reduction in external client orders, the studio reallocated resources from contract development to the application. Increased digital content consumption during lockdowns contributed to a rise in the application's usage and revenue. As the application developed, it became the company's product with the largest user base. Novosvětský described an increase in downloads over a twelve-month period, which he linked in part to the company's activities abroad, including participation in events focused on mobile marketing in the United States. These activities were an important factor in the further development of AppBlock. === Internationalization and market expansion === Within roughly the first eight years of the company's existence, MobileSoft became active both in the domestic Czech market and in the United States, supported among other things by participation in the CzechAccelerator program, which is intended to help Czech firms enter foreign markets. In mid-August 2021 the developers launched a version for iOS, which soon began to attract paying users. The expansion to iOS was accompanied by plans for cooperation with the Procrastination.com platform, intended to complement the blocking functions with educational content related to digital media use, sleep and work habits. By 2025, AppBlock was localised into 15 languages, with the largest share of users in the United States, the United Kingdom, Germany, and France, with recent growth in Brazil, and usage extending across several continents. AppBlock has reached more than 10 million installations. In the same period its creators announced plans to refine existing functions and to expand support beyond mobile phones to desktop use, including through support for additional web browsers. == Features == === Supported platforms === AppBlock is distributed as a mobile application for Android and iOS users through Google Play and the Apple App Store. Browser extensions for desktop systems are available for Google Chrome, Microsoft Edge and Brave. === Functionality === AppBlock's core function is to restrict access to selected applications and websites. The mobile application shows a list of installed apps and lets the user select which ones to block. It also includes tools to block specific websites and, on iOS, to block certain phrases entered in the Safari browser. AppBlock can mute notifications from selected applications, so alerts from those apps do not appear while blocking is active. In addition to choosing which apps or content to block, the software also offers an allowlist mode, where only selected applications remain accessible and all others are blocked. Blocking rules are organized into configurable schedules, called profiles. Users can create profiles that define time periods when selected apps and websites are unavailable. Newer versions also allow profiles to be activated automatically based on the time of day, days of the week, the device's location, or connection to specific Wi-Fi networks. The iOS version lets users set limits on how often or how long certain apps can be used before they are blocked, and it can track and restrict screen time for individual apps. In addition to these recurring rules, AppBlock includes a Quick Block feature that temporarily blocks selected apps and websites with a single action, without requiring a separate long-term schedule. Strict Mode is an optional setting that limits the ability to change blocking once it is active. For a specified period, it prevents editing AppBlock's rules and can be configured to stop the app from being uninstalled during that time. While Strict Mode is enabled, users cannot modify or disable the restrictions they have set. Deactivation requires specific verification steps, such as connecting the device to a charger or obtaining approval from a designated contact person. The mobile application also includes statistical and reporting features. In addition to blocking, AppBlock lets users view statistics and data about their use of applications and websites, including screen-time summaries and focus sessions that silence notifications and enforce blocking during defined work or study periods. Browser extensions for desktop environments apply AppBlock's website-blocking functions on Windows and macOS systems through supported web browsers. == Business model == AppBlock uses a freemium revenue model. The basic version of the application is available free of charge and allows blocking of up to three applications at the same time. The premium version removes this limit and adds further configuration options. In 2020, the application shifted from a one-time payment structure to a subscription model. By 2021, AppBlock had more than seven thousand paying users and annual revenue of about four million Czech crowns. By 2025, annual revenue reached approximately 4 million US dollars (80 million CZK) before taxes and platform fees, with roughly 20 percent of active users subscribing to the paid version. == Usage == AppBlock limits access to selected applications and websites in order to reduce smartphone overuse and digital distraction. It is used to block social media, games and other services considered addictive, with the aim of reducing frequent checking of mobile devices and creating time intervals in which these services are unavailable. Reported use cases of AppBlock cover work, students, parents, ADHD, mental health, well-being and business. The application is used both by individual users and within workplace initiatives in which employees install it to reduce digital distractions during working hours.

  Read more →
• 

  Responsible AI Safety and Education Act

  The Responsible AI Safety and Education Act (RAISE Act) is a New York State law that imposes transparency, safety, and reporting requirements on developers of large frontier artificial intelligence models. The law was signed by Governor Kathy Hochul on December 19, 2025. It was sponsored by State Senator Andrew Gounardes and Assemblymember Alex Bores. The RAISE Act is the second U.S. state law to regulate frontier AI model developers, following California's Transparency in Frontier Artificial Intelligence Act (TFAIA), which was signed in September 2025. Hochul signed the bill on the condition that the legislature would pass chapter amendments to bring the law closer to the California model. The amending bills (A9449/S8828) were introduced in January 2026; as of February 2026 they remain in committee, though the Governor's office and legal commentators treat the agreed-upon amendments as representing the final form of the law. == Provisions == The following describes the RAISE Act as it is expected to operate after the agreed-upon chapter amendments take effect. The law is expected to take effect on January 1, 2027. === Scope === The law applies to "large frontier developers," defined as companies with annual revenues exceeding $500 million that develop "frontier models," which are foundation models trained using more than 1026 floating-point operations (FLOPs). The version passed by the legislature in June 2025 had instead defined large developers based on having spent over $100 million in aggregate compute costs, and also included a provision prohibiting deployment of frontier models posing "unreasonable risk of critical harm"; both were removed as part of the negotiations between Hochul and the legislature. Accredited colleges and universities engaged in academic research are exempt, as is the state's Empire AI consortium. === Safety and transparency framework === Large frontier developers must write, implement, and publicly publish a "frontier AI framework" describing how they assess and mitigate catastrophic risks, secure unreleased model weights against unauthorized access, use third-party evaluators, govern internal use of frontier models, and respond to safety incidents. The framework must describe these measures "in detail," a requirement that goes beyond the California TFAIA's requirement to describe a developer's "approach." The framework must be reviewed at least annually, and material modifications must be published with justification within 30 days. Before or concurrently with deploying a new or substantially modified frontier model, developers must publish a transparency report including the model's release date, supported languages and output modalities, intended uses, and any restrictions on use. Large frontier developers must additionally include summaries of catastrophic risk assessments and the extent of third-party involvement. === Catastrophic risk and incident reporting === The law defines "catastrophic risk" as a foreseeable and material risk that a frontier model will contribute to the death of or serious injury to more than 50 people, or more than $1 billion in property damage, arising from a frontier model providing expert-level assistance in creating chemical, biological, radiological, or nuclear weapons; engaging in cyberattacks or conduct equivalent to crimes such as murder, assault, or theft without meaningful human oversight; or evading the control of its developer or user. Loss of equity value is explicitly excluded from the definition of property damage. "Critical safety incidents" include unauthorized access to model weights resulting in death or injury, materialization of a catastrophic risk, loss of control of a frontier model causing death or injury, and a model using deceptive techniques to subvert developer controls outside of an evaluation context in a manner that increases catastrophic risk. Frontier developers must report critical safety incidents within 72 hours, or within 24 hours if the incident poses an imminent risk of death or serious physical injury. === Enforcement === The chapter amendments establish a new office within the New York State Department of Financial Services to oversee compliance, receive incident reports, and publish annual reports on AI safety beginning in 2028. Large frontier developers must file disclosure statements with this office and pay pro rata assessments to fund its operations. The New York Attorney General may bring civil actions, with penalties of up to $1 million for a first violation and $3 million for subsequent violations. The version passed by the legislature in June 2025 had set penalties at up to $10 million and $30 million respectively. The law does not create a private right of action. == Legislative history == The bill was introduced in the Assembly on March 5, 2025, by Assemblymember Alex Bores, and in the Senate on March 27, 2025, by Senator Andrew Gounardes. After a series of amendments, the legislature passed the bill in June 2025. Governor Hochul did not immediately sign the bill, using nearly all the time available under New York law before acting; had she not signed by the end of 2025, the bill would have been pocket vetoed. The tech industry lobbied against the bill during this period, and Hochul initially proposed a near-complete rewrite modeled on California's TFAIA. Legislators resisted the extent of the changes, and the two sides ultimately agreed on a version that used the California law as a base but preserved several provisions that went beyond it, including the 72-hour incident reporting timeline and the creation of a dedicated enforcement office. Hochul signed the original bill (S6953-B/A6453-B) on December 19, 2025, with the legislature committing to pass chapter amendments formalizing the agreed changes in the January 2026 session. The amending bills (A9449 in the Assembly, S8828 in the Senate) were introduced on January 6 and January 8, 2026. OpenAI and Anthropic expressed support for the law. Anthropic's head of external affairs Sarah Heck said the two state laws "should inspire Congress to build on them." The super PAC network Leading the Future, backed by Andreessen Horowitz and OpenAI president Greg Brockman, subsequently announced plans to challenge Bores in a future election. == Federal preemption debate == Hochul signed the RAISE Act eight days after President Donald Trump issued an executive order on December 11, 2025, directing the Department of Justice to challenge state AI laws deemed to conflict with a "minimally burdensome" national AI policy. On January 9, 2026, the Department of Justice announced the establishment of an AI Litigation Task Force as called for by the executive order. The executive order also threatened states with loss of certain federal broadband funding if their AI laws were found to be onerous. Legal commentators have noted several potential avenues for federal challenge, including arguments that the law constitutes compelled speech, violates the dormant Commerce Clause by creating a patchwork of state regulations, or is preempted by federal AI policy. == Comparison with California's TFAIA == The RAISE Act was designed to align with California's Transparency in Frontier Artificial Intelligence Act, signed on September 29, 2025. Both laws use the same 1026 FLOP threshold to define frontier models and the same $500 million revenue threshold to define large developers. Both require public safety frameworks, transparency reports, and incident reporting. The RAISE Act's 72-hour incident reporting window is stricter than the TFAIA's 15-day window, though both require faster reporting for incidents posing imminent physical risk (24 hours under the RAISE Act, immediate under the TFAIA). The RAISE Act establishes a dedicated enforcement office within the Department of Financial Services, whereas California routes reports through the Office of Emergency Services. The RAISE Act requires developers to describe their safety measures "in detail" and how they "handle" various risks, whereas the TFAIA requires developers to describe their "approach."

  Read more →
• 

  Lernmatrix

  Lernmatrix (German for "learning matrix") is a special type of artificial neural network (ANN) architecture, similar to associative memory, invented around 1960 by Karl Steinbuch, a pioneer in computer science and ANNs. This model for learning systems could establish complex associations between certain sets of characteristics (e.g., letters of an alphabet) and their meanings. == Function == The Lernmatrix generally consists of n "characteristic lines" and m "meaning lines," where each characteristic line is connected to each meaning line, similar to how neurons in the brain are connected by synapses. (This can be realized in various ways – according to Steinbuch, this could be done by hardware or software). To train a Lernmatrix, values are specified on the corresponding characteristic and meaning lines (binary or real); then the connections between all pairs of characteristic and meaning lines are strengthened by the Hebb rule. A trained Lernmatrix, when given a specific input on the characteristic lines, activates the corresponding meaning lines. In modern language, it is a linear projection module. By appropriately interconnecting several Lernmatrices, a switching system can be built that, after completing certain training phases, is ultimately able to automatically determine the most probable associated meaning for an input sequence of features.

  Read more →