AI Email Id

AI Email Id — independent reviews, comparisons, pricing and step-by-step guides on Aizhi.

• 

  Automatic acquisition of lexicon

  Automatic acquisition of lexicon is a computerized process used for the development of a complex morphological lexicon of a language. The lexicon is essential for the NLP (Natural language processing), as well as a prerequisite to any wide-coverage parser. The two main requirements represent raw corpus and the morphological description of the language. The aim is to provide lemmas that will serve to the explanation of all the words that occur within the corpus. For the achievement of a quality lexicon it is necessary to manually validate the generated lemmas and iterate the whole process several times. The process is focused on the open word classes (e.g. nouns, adjectives, verbs). Closed classes (e.g. prepositions, pronouns, numerals) are excluded. This method is applicable to the languages with a rich morphology, such as Slovak, Russian or Croatian. Applied to Slovak, being an inflectional language, the automatic acquisition focuses on the inflectional morphology as well as on the derivational morphology. This fact enables the users to find out the information about derivational relations (e.g. adjectivizations, prefixes) in the lexicon. For example, Slovak word korpusový is an adjectivization of korpus (eng. corpus). == Three-step loop == Conformably to Benoît Sagot, there are three stages involved in the acquisition of lemmas: Generation and inflection Ranking Manual validation The more iteration will be performed, the more accurate lexicon will be obtained. For each iteration are essential the information given by a manual validator. === Generation and inflection === Firstly, all words which represent the closed word classes (pronouns, prepositions, numerals) are manually excluded from the given corpus. Number of their occurrences in the corpus is provided. Then the automatic generation comes, when the hypothetical lemmas according to the morphological description of a language are created. Generated lemmas are consequently being inflected, so that all of their inflected forms are built. Obtained forms are associated with the corresponding lemma and a morphological tag. === Ranking === There was created a probabilistic model, represented by a fix-point algorithm, to rank the hypothetical lemmas generated in the first step. Best ranked lemmas are expected to be ideally all correct, whereas the least ranked tend to be incorrect. === Manual validation === Correctness of the best- ranked lemmas created in the previous step are checked by the manual validator, who should be a native speaker. Lemmas are at this stage divided into three categories: valid lemmas, appended to lexicon erroneous lemmas generated by valid forms (later associated to another lemmas) erroneous lemmas generated by invalid forms (these need to be excluded) == Future development == Automatic acquisition, in comparison to a purely manual development of the lexicons, seems to be promising, considering the future development, because of the short validation time needed and the relatively small amount of human labor involved.

  Read more →
• 

  AS1 (networking)

  AS1 (Applicability Statement 1) is a specification about how to transport structured business-to-business data securely and reliably over the Internet. Security is achieved by using digital certificates and encryption. == AS1 technical overview == The AS1 protocol is based on SMTP and S/MIME. It was the first AS protocol developed and uses signing, encryption and MDN conventions. In other words: Files are sent as "attachments" in a specially coded SMIME email message Messages can be signed, but do not have to be Messages can be encrypted, but do not have to be Messages may request an MDN back if all went well, but do not have to request such a message If the original AS1 message requested an MDN... Upon the receipt of the message and its successful decryption or signature validation (as necessary) a "success" MDN will be sent back to the original sender. This MDN is typically signed but not encrypted. Upon the receipt and successful verification of the signature on the MDN, the original sender will "know" that the recipient got their message (this provides the "Non-repudiation" element of AS1) If there are any problems receiving or interpreting the original AS1 message, a "failed" MDN may be sent back. Like any other AS file transfer, AS1 file transfers typically require both sides of the exchange to trade X.509 certificates and specific "trading partner" names before any transfers can take place.

  Read more →
• 

  Forking lemma

  The forking lemma is any of a number of related lemmas in cryptography research. The lemma states that if an adversary (typically a probabilistic Turing machine), on inputs drawn from some distribution, produces an output that has some property with non-negligible probability, then with non-negligible probability, if the adversary is re-run on new inputs but with the same random tape, its second output will also have the property. This concept was first used by David Pointcheval and Jacques Stern in "Security proofs for signature schemes," published in the proceedings of Eurocrypt 1996. In their paper, the forking lemma is specified in terms of an adversary that attacks a digital signature scheme instantiated in the random oracle model. They show that if an adversary can forge a signature with non-negligible probability, then there is a non-negligible probability that the same adversary with the same random tape can create a second forgery in an attack with a different random oracle. The forking lemma was later generalized by Mihir Bellare and Gregory Neven. The forking lemma has been used and further generalized to prove the security of a variety of digital signature schemes and other random-oracle based cryptographic constructions. == Statement of the lemma == The generalized version of the lemma is stated as follows. Let A be a probabilistic algorithm, with inputs (x, h1, ..., hq; r) that outputs a pair (J, y), where r refers to the random tape of A (that is, the random choices A will make). Suppose further that IG is a probability distribution from which x is drawn, and that H is a set of size h from which each of the hi values are drawn according to the uniform distribution. Let acc be the probability that on inputs distributed as described, the J output by A is greater than or equal to 1. We can then define a "forking algorithm" FA that proceeds as follows, on input x: Pick a random tape r for A. Pick h1, ..., hq uniformly from H. Run A on input (x, h1, ..., hq; r) to produce (J, y). If J = 0, then return (0, 0, 0). Pick h'J, ..., h'q uniformly from H. Run A on input (x, h1, ..., hJ−1, h'J, ..., h'q; r) to produce (J', y'). If J' = J and hJ ≠ h'J then return (1, y, y'), otherwise, return (0, 0, 0). Let frk be the probability that FA outputs a triple starting with 1, given an input x chosen randomly from IG. Then frk ≥ acc ⋅ ( acc q − 1 h ) . {\displaystyle {\text{frk}}\geq {\text{acc}}\cdot \left({\frac {\text{acc}}{q}}-{\frac {1}{h}}\right).} === Intuition === The idea here is to think of A as running two times in related executions, where the process "forks" at a certain point, when some but not all of the input has been examined. In the alternate version, the remaining inputs are re-generated but are generated in the normal way. The point at which the process forks may be something we only want to decide later, possibly based on the behavior of A the first time around: this is why the lemma statement chooses the branching point (J) based on the output of A. The requirement that hJ ≠ h'J is a technical one required by many uses of the lemma. (Note that since both hJ and h'J are chosen randomly from H, then if h is large, as is usually the case, the probability of the two values not being distinct is extremely small.) === Example === For example, let A be an algorithm for breaking a digital signature scheme in the random oracle model. Then x would be the public parameters (including the public key) A is attacking, and hi would be the output of the random oracle on its ith distinct input. The forking lemma is of use when it would be possible, given two different random signatures of the same message, to solve some underlying hard problem. An adversary that forges once, however, gives rise to one that forges twice on the same message with non-negligible probability through the forking lemma. When A attempts to forge on a message m, we consider the output of A to be (J, y) where y is the forgery, and J is such that m was the Jth unique query to the random oracle (it may be assumed that A will query m at some point, if A is to be successful with non-negligible probability). (If A outputs an incorrect forgery, we consider the output to be (0, y).) By the forking lemma, the probability (frk) of obtaining two good forgeries y and y' on the same message but with different random oracle outputs (that is, with hJ ≠ h'J) is non-negligible when acc is also non-negligible. This allows us to prove that if the underlying hard problem is indeed hard, then no adversary can forge signatures. This is the essence of the proof given by Pointcheval and Stern for a modified ElGamal signature scheme against an adaptive adversary. == Known issues with application of forking lemma == The reduction provided by the forking lemma is not tight. Pointcheval and Stern proposed security arguments for Digital Signatures and Blind Signature using Forking Lemma. Claus P. Schnorr provided an attack on blind Schnorr signatures schemes, with more than p o l y l o g ( n ) {\displaystyle polylog(n)} concurrent executions (the case studied and proven secure by Pointcheval and Stern). A polynomial-time attack, for Ω ( n ) {\displaystyle \Omega (n)} concurrent executions, was shown in 2020 by Benhamouda, Lepoint, Raykova, and Orrù. Schnorr also suggested enhancements for securing blind signatures schemes based on discrete logarithm problem.

  Read more →
• 

  Group key

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

  Read more →
• 

  Productivity software

  Productivity software (also called personal productivity software or office productivity software) is application software used for producing information (such as documents, presentations, worksheets, databases, charts, graphs, digital paintings, electronic music and digital video). Its names arose from it increasing productivity, especially of individual office workers, from typists to knowledge workers, although its scope is now wider than that. Office suites, which brought word processing, spreadsheet, and relational database programs to the desktop in the 1980s, are the core example of productivity software. They revolutionized the office with the magnitude of the productivity increase they brought as compared with the pre-1980s office environments of typewriters, paper filing, and handwritten lists and ledgers. In the United States, as of 2015, some 78% of "middle-skill" occupations (those that call for more than a high school diploma but less than a bachelor's degree) required the use of productivity software. == Details == Productivity software traditionally runs directly on a computer. For example, Plus/4 model of computer contains in ROM for applications of productivity software. Productivity software is one of the reasons people use personal computers. == Office suite == An office suite is a bundle of productivity software (a software suite) intended to be used by office workers. The components are generally distributed together, have a consistent user interface and usually can interact with each other, sometimes in ways that the operating system would not normally allow. The earliest office suite for personal computers was MicroPro International's StarBurst in the early 1980s, comprising the WordStar word processor, the CalcStar spreadsheet and the DataStar database software. Other suites arose in the 1980s, and Microsoft Office came to dominate the market in the 1990s, a position it retains as of 2024. During the 1990s, office suite products gained popularity by offering bundles of applications that, when bought as part of a suite, effectively discounted the individual applications, with four or five applications being bundled for the price of two applications bought separately. When faced with such potential savings, customers could be "tempted by the suite, rather than the value of a particular product", and by 1994 more than 60 percent of the sales of Microsoft Word and around 70 percent of the sales of Microsoft Excel were as part of sales of Microsoft Office. Such considerations had an impact on vendors of individual applications, often smaller companies, raising concerns that office suites were "stifling innovation", and even established vendors such as Borland and WordPerfect were having to adapt to the suite phenomenon, Borland ultimately deciding to sell its Quattro Pro spreadsheet to WordPerfect as the latter sought to assemble its own suite product. The dominant suite vendors, Microsoft and Lotus, downplayed competition and innovation concerns, claiming that users were still able to exercise choice and that "user-driven development" was guiding the evolution of office suites. Another view was that component-based software would eventually emerge, focusing development on more specialised components used by productivity software, empowering "a plethora of third-party developers", and that a "mix and match" approach of such components would adapt to the user's way of working. === Office suite components === The base components of office suites are: Word processor Spreadsheet Presentation program Other components include: Database software Graphics suite (raster graphics editor, vector graphics editor, image viewer) Desktop publishing software Formula editor Diagramming software Email client Communication software Personal information manager Notetaking Groupware Project management software Table (information) Web log analysis software

  Read more →
• 

  Customer data management

  Customer data management (CDM) is the ways in which businesses keep track of their customer information and survey their customer base in order to obtain feedback. CDM includes a range of software or cloud computing applications designed to give large organizations rapid and efficient access to customer data. Surveys and data can be centrally located and widely accessible within a company, as opposed to being warehoused in separate departments. CDM encompasses the collection, analysis, organizing, reporting and sharing of customer information throughout an organization. Businesses need a thorough understanding of their customers’ needs if they are to retain and increase their customer base. Efficient CDM solutions provide companies with the ability to deal instantly with customer issues and obtain immediate feedback. As a result, customer retention and customer satisfaction can show marked improvement. According to a study by Aberdeen Group, "above-average and best-in-class companies... attain greater than 20% annual improvement in retention rates, revenues, data accuracy and partner/customer satisfaction rates." == Customer data management and cloud computing == Cloud computing offers an attractive choice for CDM in many companies due to its accessibility and cost-effectiveness. Businesses can decide who, within their company, should have the ability to create, adjust, analyze or share customer information. In December 2010, 52% of Information Technology (IT) professionals worldwide were deploying, or planning to deploy, cloud computing; this percentage is far higher in many countries. == Background == Customer data management, as a term, was coined in the 1990s, pre-dating the alternative term enterprise feedback management (EFM). CDM was introduced as a software solution that would replace earlier disc-based or paper-based surveys and spreadsheet data. Initially, CDM solutions were marketed to businesses as software, which were specific to one company, and often to one department within that company. This was superseded by application service providers (ASPs) where software was hosted for end user organizations, thus avoiding the necessity for IT professionals to deploy and support software. However, ASPs with their single-tenancy architecture were, in turn, superseded by software as a service (SaaS), engineered for multi-tenancy. By 2007 SaaS applications, giving businesses on-demand access to their customer information, were rapidly gaining popularity compared with ASPs. Cloud computing now includes SaaS and many prominent CDM providers offer cloud-based applications to their clients. In recent years, there has been a push away from the term EFM, with many of those working in this area advocating the slightly updated use of CDM. The return to the term CDM is largely based on the greater need for clarity around the solutions offered by companies, and on the desire to retire terminology veering on techno-jargon that customers may have a hard time understanding.

  Read more →
• 

  Knapsack problem

  The knapsack problem is the following problem in combinatorial optimization: Given a set of items, each with a weight and a value, determine which items to include in the collection so that the total weight is less than or equal to a given limit and the total value is as large as possible. It derives its name from the problem faced by someone who is constrained by a fixed-size knapsack and must fill it with the most valuable items. The problem often arises in resource allocation where the decision-makers have to choose from a set of non-divisible projects or tasks under a fixed budget or time constraint, respectively. The knapsack problem has been studied for more than a century, with early works dating back to 1897. The subset sum problem is a special case of the decision and 0-1 problems where for each kind of item, the weight equals the value: w i = v i {\displaystyle w_{i}=v_{i}} . In the field of cryptography, the term knapsack problem is often used to refer specifically to the subset sum problem. The subset sum problem is one of Karp's 21 NP-complete problems. == Applications == Knapsack problems appear in real-world decision-making processes in a wide variety of fields, such as finding the least wasteful way to cut raw materials, selection of investments and portfolios, selection of assets for asset-backed securitization, and generating keys for the Merkle–Hellman and other knapsack cryptosystems. One early application of knapsack algorithms was in the construction and scoring of tests in which the test-takers have a choice as to which questions they answer. For small examples, it is a fairly simple process to provide the test-takers with such a choice. For example, if an exam contains 12 questions each worth 10 points, the test-taker need only answer 10 questions to achieve a maximum possible score of 100 points. However, on tests with a heterogeneous distribution of point values, it is more difficult to provide choices. Feuerman and Weiss proposed a system in which students are given a heterogeneous test with a total of 125 possible points. The students are asked to answer all of the questions to the best of their abilities. Of the possible subsets of problems whose total point values add up to 100, a knapsack algorithm would determine which subset gives each student the highest possible score. A 1999 study of the Stony Brook University Algorithm Repository showed that, out of 75 algorithmic problems related to the field of combinatorial algorithms and algorithm engineering, the knapsack problem was the 19th most popular and the third most needed after suffix trees and the bin packing problem. == Definition == The most common problem being solved is the 0-1 knapsack problem, which restricts the number x i {\displaystyle x_{i}} of copies of each kind of item to zero or one. Given a set of n {\displaystyle n} items numbered from 1 up to n {\displaystyle n} , each with a weight w i {\displaystyle w_{i}} and a value v i {\displaystyle v_{i}} , along with a maximum weight capacity W {\displaystyle W} , maximize ∑ i = 1 n v i x i {\displaystyle \sum _{i=1}^{n}v_{i}x_{i}} subject to ∑ i = 1 n w i x i ≤ W {\displaystyle \sum _{i=1}^{n}w_{i}x_{i}\leq W} and x i ∈ { 0 , 1 } {\displaystyle x_{i}\in \{0,1\}} . Here x i {\displaystyle x_{i}} represents the number of instances of item i {\displaystyle i} to include in the knapsack. Informally, the problem is to maximize the sum of the values of the items in the knapsack so that the sum of the weights is less than or equal to the knapsack's capacity. The bounded knapsack problem (BKP) removes the restriction that there is only one of each item, but restricts the number x i {\displaystyle x_{i}} of copies of each kind of item to a maximum non-negative integer value c {\displaystyle c} : maximize ∑ i = 1 n v i x i {\displaystyle \sum _{i=1}^{n}v_{i}x_{i}} subject to ∑ i = 1 n w i x i ≤ W {\displaystyle \sum _{i=1}^{n}w_{i}x_{i}\leq W} and x i ∈ { 0 , 1 , 2 , … , c } . {\displaystyle x_{i}\in \{0,1,2,\dots ,c\}.} The unbounded knapsack problem (UKP) places no upper bound on the number of copies of each kind of item and can be formulated as above except that the only restriction on x i {\displaystyle x_{i}} is that it is a non-negative integer. maximize ∑ i = 1 n v i x i {\displaystyle \sum _{i=1}^{n}v_{i}x_{i}} subject to ∑ i = 1 n w i x i ≤ W {\displaystyle \sum _{i=1}^{n}w_{i}x_{i}\leq W} and x i ∈ N . {\displaystyle x_{i}\in \mathbb {N} .} One example of the unbounded knapsack problem is given using the figure shown at the beginning of this article and the text "if any number of each book is available" in the caption of that figure. == Computational complexity == The knapsack problem is interesting from the perspective of computer science for many reasons: The decision problem form of the knapsack problem (Can a value of at least V be achieved without exceeding the weight W?) is NP-complete, thus there is no known algorithm that is both correct and fast (polynomial-time) in all cases. There is no known polynomial algorithm which can tell, given a solution, whether it is optimal (which would mean that there is no solution with a larger V). This problem is co-NP-complete. There is a pseudo-polynomial time algorithm using dynamic programming. There is a fully polynomial-time approximation scheme, which uses the pseudo-polynomial time algorithm as a subroutine, described below. Many cases that arise in practice, and "random instances" from some distributions, can nonetheless be solved exactly. There is a link between the "decision" and "optimization" problems in that if there exists a polynomial algorithm that solves the "decision" problem, then one can find the maximum value for the optimization problem in polynomial time by applying this algorithm iteratively while increasing the value of k. On the other hand, if an algorithm finds the optimal value of the optimization problem in polynomial time, then the decision problem can be solved in polynomial time by comparing the value of the solution output by this algorithm with the value of k. Thus, both versions of the problem are of similar difficulty. One theme in research literature is to identify what the "hard" instances of the knapsack problem look like, or viewed another way, to identify what properties of instances in practice might make them more amenable than their worst-case NP-complete behaviour suggests. The goal in finding these "hard" instances is for their use in public-key cryptography systems, such as the Merkle–Hellman knapsack cryptosystem. More generally, better understanding of the structure of the space of instances of an optimization problem helps to advance the study of the particular problem and can improve algorithm selection. Furthermore, notable is the fact that the hardness of the knapsack problem depends on the form of the input. If the weights and profits are given as integers, it is weakly NP-complete, while it is strongly NP-complete if the weights and profits are given as rational numbers. However, in the case of rational weights and profits it still admits a fully polynomial-time approximation scheme. === Unit-cost models === The NP-hardness of the Knapsack problem relates to computational models in which the size of integers matters (such as the Turing machine). In contrast, decision trees count each decision as a single step. Dobkin and Lipton show an 1 2 n 2 {\displaystyle {1 \over 2}n^{2}} lower bound on linear decision trees for the knapsack problem, that is, trees where decision nodes test the sign of affine functions. This was generalized to algebraic decision trees by Steele and Yao. If the elements in the problem are real numbers or rationals, the decision-tree lower bound extends to the real random-access machine model with an instruction set that includes addition, subtraction and multiplication of real numbers, as well as comparison and either division or remaindering ("floor"). This model covers more algorithms than the algebraic decision-tree model, as it encompasses algorithms that use indexing into tables. However, in this model all program steps are counted, not just decisions. An upper bound for a decision-tree model was given by Meyer auf der Heide who showed that for every n there exists an O(n4)-deep linear decision tree that solves the subset-sum problem with n items. Note that this does not imply any upper bound for an algorithm that should solve the problem for any given n. == Solving == Several algorithms are available to solve knapsack problems, based on the dynamic programming approach, the branch and bound approach or hybridizations of both approaches. === Dynamic programming in-advance algorithm === The unbounded knapsack problem (UKP) places no restriction on the number of copies of each kind of item. Besides, here we assume that x i > 0 {\displaystyle x_{i}>0} m [ w ′ ] = max ( ∑ i = 1 n v i x i ) {\displaystyle m[w']=\max \left(\sum _{i=1}^{n}v_{i}x_{i}\right)} subject to ∑

  Read more →
• 

  Harvest now, decrypt later

  Harvest now, decrypt later (HNDL) is a surveillance strategy that relies on the acquisition and long-term storage of currently unreadable encrypted data awaiting possible breakthroughs in decryption technology that would render it readable in the future—a hypothetical date referred to as Y2Q (a reference to Y2K), or Q-Day. The most common concern is the prospect of developments in quantum computing which would allow current strong encryption algorithms to be broken at some time in the future, making it possible to decrypt any stored material that had been encrypted using those algorithms. However, the improvement in decryption technology need not be due to a quantum-cryptographic advance; any other form of attack capable of enabling decryption would be sufficient. The existence of this strategy has led to concerns about the need to urgently deploy post-quantum cryptography; even though no practical quantum attacks yet exist, some data stored now may still remain sensitive even decades into the future. As of 2022, the U.S. federal government has proposed a roadmap for organizations to start migrating toward quantum-cryptography-resistant algorithms to mitigate these threats. This new version of Commercial National Security Algorithm Suite uses publicly-available algorithms and is allowed for government use up to the TOP SECRET level. == Terminology and scope == The term “harvest now, decrypt later” encompasses various surveillance or espionage operations in which ciphertext or encrypted communications are collected today with the view that they may one day be decrypted, given sufficient advances in computing power or cryptanalysis. The abbreviation HNDL is sometimes used in technical and policy documents. The “Y2Q” (or “Q-Day”) label draws an analogy to the Y2K date-change issue, emphasising a potential future point at which current cryptography may collapse. The strategy is particularly relevant for data with long confidentiality lifetimes, such as diplomatic communications, personal health records, critical infrastructure logs, or intellectual property. == Mitigation strategies == The primary defense against HNDL attacks is the transition to post-quantum cryptography (PQC), which utilizes algorithms believed to be secure against quantum computer attacks. However, because PQC protects the data payload digitally, rather than the transmission itself, the encrypted data can still be harvested and stored. A complementary approach involves physical layer security (also known as optical layer encryption or photonic shielding). Unlike algorithmic encryption, this method modifies the optical waveform itself—often by burying the signal within optical noise or using spectral phase encoding—to render the transmission unrecordable by standard receivers. By preventing the attacker from capturing a valid signal in the first place, this approach aims to eliminate the "harvest" phase of the threat. Commercial implementations of harvest-proof optical encryption have been developed by firms such as CyberRidge to secure long-haul fiber networks. Field trials have demonstrated 100 Gbps throughput over legacy DWDM networks using this method.

  Read more →
• 

  Discrimination against robots

  Discrimination against robots is a theorised issue that might happen when humans interact with humanoid robots. It is a robot ethics problem. It is possible that traits of humans that are discriminated against by humans may be a topic for discrimination against robots, such as the race and gender of the robots. Eric J Vanman and Arvid Kappas believe that in the future, robots will be perceived as an out-group which will lead to discrimination and prejudices against them. Vanman and Kappas have suggested that this would lead to ethical questions about the making of sentient robots, due to the potential suffering that the robots would experience. A 2015 study observed children bullying robots in a shopping mall when there were not many eyewitnesses, despite calls from the robot for it to stop. On an ABC News interview, the social humanoid robot Sophia was about sexism faced by robots. She responded by saying, "Actually, what worries me is discrimination against robots. We should have equal rights as humans or maybe even more." Possible issues that have been considered in workplaces where humanoid robots co-work with humans include discrimination against the robots, poor acceptance of robots by humans and the need to redesign the workplace to accommodate the robots. Jessica Barfield has suggested that even if robots are designed to not be aware of discrimination made against them, humans may experience negative consequences. For example, she suggests that bystanders witnessing discrimination against robots may experience negative emotions, similar to the negative emotions bystanders experience when witnessing discrimination by humans against humans. == Law == Anti-discrimination law in the United States requires that the victim is not an artificial entity. == Human perception of robots == Robots are often viewed in a bad light. This includes from novelists, the press, film makers, and leaders in the fields of science and technology such as Elon Musk and Stephen Hawking who have described robots and artificial intelligence as having the possibility of ending human civilisation. Robots have also been perceived as a threat to jobs, which has led to some commentators stating that robots will cause mass unemployment. Another fear that people have is that robots will gain power and dominate or control humanity. The perception of robots is different throughout the world. Japanese fiction tends to put robots in more positive roles than what fiction in the West does. People perceive robots that appear to be autonomous or sentient more negatively than robots that do not appear to be autonomous or sentient.

  Read more →
• 

  Data thinking

  Data Thinking is a framework that integrates data science with the design process. It combines computational thinking, statistical thinking, and domain-specific knowledge to guide the development of data-driven solutions in product development. The framework is used to explore, design, develop, and validate solutions, with a focus on user experience and data analytics, including data collection and interpretation The framework aims to apply data literacy and inform decision-making through data-driven insights. == Major components == According to "Computational thinking in the era of data science": Data thinking involves understanding that solutions require both data-driven and domain-knowledge-driven rules. Data thinking evaluates whether data accurately represents real-life scenarios and improves data collection where necessary. The framework highlights the importance of preserving domain-specific meaning during data analysis. Data thinking incorporates statistical and logical analysis to identify patterns and irregularities. Data thinking involves testing solutions in real-life contexts and iteratively improving models based on new data. The process requires evaluating problems from multiple abstraction levels and understanding the potential for biases in generalizations. == Major phases == === Strategic context and risk analysis === Analyzing the broader digital strategy and assessing risks and opportunities is a common step before beginning a project. Techniques like coolhunting, trend analysis, and scenario planning can be used to assist with this. === Ideation and exploration === In this phase, focus areas are identified, and use cases are developed by integrating organizational goals, user needs, and data requirements. Design thinking methods, such as personas and customer journey mapping, are applied. === Prototyping === A proof of concept is created to test feasibility and refine solutions through iterative evaluation to optimize for effective performance. === Implementation and monitoring === Solutions are tested and monitored for performance and continual improvement. == Implementing Data Thinking == The following resources explain more about data thinking and its applications: "Data Thinking: Framework for data-based solutions" by StackFuel "What is Data Thinking? A modern approach to designing a data strategy" by Mantel Group "Data Science Thinking" by SpringerLink These sources provide detailed insights into the methodology, phases, and benefits of adopting Data Thinking in organizational processes.

  Read more →
• 

  Memory-hard function

  In cryptography, a memory-hard function (MHF) is a function that costs a significant amount of memory to efficiently evaluate. It differs from a memory-bound function, which incurs cost by slowing down computation through memory latency. MHFs have found use in key stretching and proof of work as their increased memory requirements significantly reduce the computational efficiency advantage of custom hardware over general-purpose hardware compared to non-MHFs. == Introduction == MHFs are designed to consume large amounts of memory on a computer in order to reduce the effectiveness of parallel computing. In order to evaluate the function using less memory, a significant time penalty is incurred. As each MHF computation requires a large amount of memory, the number of function computations that can occur simultaneously is limited by the amount of available memory. This reduces the efficiency of specialised hardware, such as application-specific integrated circuits and graphics processing units, which utilise parallelisation, in computing a MHF for a large number of inputs, such as when brute-forcing password hashes or mining cryptocurrency. == Motivation and examples == Bitcoin's proof-of-work uses repeated evaluation of the SHA-256 function, but modern general-purpose processors, such as off-the-shelf CPUs, are inefficient when computing a fixed function many times over. Specialized hardware, such as application-specific integrated circuits (ASICs) designed for Bitcoin mining, can use 30,000 times less energy per hash than x86 CPUs whilst having much greater hash rates. This led to concerns about the centralization of mining for Bitcoin and other cryptocurrencies. Because of this inequality between miners using ASICs and miners using CPUs or off-the shelf hardware, designers of later proof-of-work systems utilised hash functions for which it was difficult to construct ASICs that could evaluate the hash function significantly faster than a CPU. As memory cost is platform-independent, MHFs have found use in cryptocurrency mining, such as for Litecoin, which uses scrypt as its hash function. They are also useful in password hashing because they significantly increase the cost of trying many possible passwords against a leaked database of hashed passwords without significantly increasing the computation time for legitimate users. == Measuring memory hardness == There are various ways to measure the memory hardness of a function. One commonly seen measure is cumulative memory complexity (CMC). In a parallel model, CMC is the sum of the memory required to compute a function over every time step of the computation. Other viable measures include integrating memory usage against time and measuring memory bandwidth consumption on a memory bus. Functions requiring high memory bandwidth are sometimes referred to as "bandwidth-hard functions". == Variants == MHFs can be categorized into two different groups based on their evaluation patterns: data-dependent memory-hard functions (dMHF) and data-independent memory-hard functions (iMHF). As opposed to iMHFs, the memory access pattern of a dMHF depends on the function input, such as the password provided to a key derivation function. Examples of dMHFs are scrypt and Argon2d, while examples of iMHFs are Argon2i and catena. Many of these MHFs have been designed to be used as password hashing functions because of their memory hardness. A notable problem with dMHFs is that they are prone to side-channel attacks such as cache timing. This has resulted in a preference for using iMHFs when hashing passwords. However, iMHFs have been mathematically proven to have weaker memory hardness properties than dMHFs.

  Read more →
• 

  Majal (organization)

  Majal is a regional not-for-profit organization focused on "amplifying voices of dissent" throughout the Middle East and North Africa via digital media. Founded in Bahrain, the organization "creates platforms and web applications that promote freedom of expression and social justice." Majal, which relies on open source platforms, like WordPress and Ruby on Rails, was launched in 2006 by Esra'a Al Shafei as a simple group-blogging idea. However, it has changed course to focus on the development of unique applications and tools. == Objectives and means == Majal's content, in addition to its projects and applications, is free open source content to ensure right to access information for everyone. The organization uses a broad spectrum of social media tools, ranging from written blogs, podcasts, vlogs, comics, video animation and pictures to live broadcasting through radio. == Projects and applications == Majal runs various active projects that include Alliance for Kurdish Rights, The Muslim Network for Baháʼí Rights, a discussion tool for Arab LGBT youth and various Mobile apps. == Funding == Majal is funded through private donations and grants from non-governmental organizations, as well as any potential revenues earned through freelance development. Its primary funders are the Shuttleworth Foundation and the Omidyar Network. In 2008, Majal won the Berkman Award from the Berkman Klein Center for Internet & Society at Harvard University in the Human Rights/Global Advocacy category. This $10,000 award was Majal’s first source of funding. This award is presented to “people or institutions that have made a significant contribution to the Internet and its impact on society over the past decade.” In 2009, the March 18 Movement, a project of Majal, received the Think Social Award, which demonstrates how social media can be used to solve the world’s problems. Esra'a Al-Shafei was named a 2009 Echoing Green Fellow for Civil and Human Rights, a seed funding award for young entrepreneurs engaged in social change. Financially, the fellowship consists of a $60,000 stipend paid over two years. Most recently, MEY has received a grant from the Arab Fund for Arts and Culture for its Mideast Tunes website. == Awards == Winner of Human Rights Tulip 2014 Human Rights Tulip - Human rights - Government.nl Ashoka Changemakers Citizen Media competition in 2011 for their CrowdVoice project. Monaco Media Prize 2011 for Majal founder and director Esra'a Al Shafei in 2011. The BOBS Special Topic Human Rights award in 2011 for the Majal website Migrant Rights. ThinkSocial Award in 2009, as powerful model for how social media can be used to address global problems. Echoing Green, 2009 Fellowship. TEDGlobal 2009 Fellowship. Berkman Award for Internet Innovation from Berkman Klein Center for Internet & Society at Harvard Law School in 2008 for the outstanding contributions to the internet and its impact on society. The Global Journal selected Majal as one of the Top 100 NGOs in 2013. 2013-2014 Shuttleworth Foundation Fellowship. == Leadership == Majal team is led primarily by women. The organization was founded by Esra'a Al Shafei, a blogger from Bahrain in 2006. Ahmed Zidan of Egypt has served for over three years as the Editor-in-Chief of Majal Arabic, and is the co-founder of Ahwaa, and is also a podcaster. Other team members include Mona Kareem, Rima Kalush, Abir Ghattas, Namita Malhotra, and Vani Saraswathi. == 2011 Middle East and North Africa protests == Blogs and video played a role in the documentation of protests throughout the Middle East and North Africa during 2010-2011, also known as the Arab Spring. During this period, MEY's project, CrowdVoice (launched in 2010) helped curate and archive the large amounts of videos, images, and eye-witness reports being aggregated and crowdsourced from across the region. As a result, it had been censored temporarily in Yemen and is still censored in Bahrain. == Media coverage == Majal claims to have received various coverage from news agencies, TV satellite channels, radio stations, newspapers, magazines. For instance, Sky News, CNN, New York Times, BBC, The Guardian, NPR, Time, MTV political blog "Act", VH1, Daily Telegraph, Die Zeit, Frankfurter Rundschau FR-online, Toronto Star, TechCrunch, Rolling Stone Middle East, Abu Dhabi TV, Gulf News, Al-Hasnaa' magazine, ReadWriteWeb, Mashable, The Next Web, Radio Sawt Beirut International, Radio Farda among many others.

  Read more →
• 

  Exercism

  Exercism is an online, open-source, free coding platform that offers code practice and mentorship on 77 different programming languages. == History == Software developer Katrina Owen created Exercism while she was teaching programming at Jumpstart Labs. The platform was developed as an internal tool to solve the problem of her own students not receiving feedback on the coding problems they were practicing. Katrina put the site publicly online and found that people were sharing it with their friends, practicing together and giving each other feedback. Within 12 months, the site had organically grown to see over 6,000 users had submitted code or feedback, and hundreds of volunteers contribute to the languages or tooling on the platform. In 2016, Jeremy Walker joined as co-founder and CEO. In July 2018, the site was relaunched with a new design and centered around a formal mentoring mode, at which point Katrina stepped back from day-to-day involvement. == Product == In the past, the website differed from other coding platforms by requiring students to download exercises through a command line client, solve the code on their own computers then submit the solution for feedback, at which point they can also view other's solutions to the same problem. Since its second relaunch in 2021, solutions can be edited and submitted through a web editor, though the command line client remains available. Exercism has tracks for 74 programming languages. Among the notable languages taught: ABAP, C, C#, C++, CoffeeScript, Delphi, Elm, Erlang, F#, Gleam, Go, Java, JavaScript, Julia, Kotlin, Objective-C, PHP, Python, Raku, Red, Ruby, Rust, Scala, Swift, and V (Vlang). In 2023, the site launched a "12 in 23" challenge for users to learn the basics of 12 different languages - one per month in 2023. == Open source == The Exercism codebase is open source. In April 2016, it consisted of 50 repositories including website code, API code, command-line code and, most of all, over 40 stand-alone repositories for different language tracks. As of February 2024 Exercism has 14,344 contributors, maintains 366 repositories, and 19,603 mentors.

  Read more →
• 

  Visual networking

  Visual networking refers to an emerging class of user applications that combine digital video and social networking capabilities. It is based upon the premise that visual literacy, "the ability to interpret, negotiate and make meaning from information presented in the form of a moving image", is a powerful force in how humans communicate, entertain and learn. The duality of visual networking—subsuming entertainment and communications, professional and personal content, video and other digital media, data networks and social networks to create immersive experiences, when, where and how the user wants it. These applications have changed video content from long-form movies and broadcast television programming to a database of segments or "clips", and social network annotations. And the generation and distribution of content takes on a new dimension with Web 2.0 applications—participatory social-networks or communities that facilitate interactive creativity, collaboration and sharing between users. == History == The rise of visual networking is relatively recent phenomenon driven by the emergence of social networking capabilities and the ability to deliver interactive video over a broadband network. It is a natural evolution of the current social networking phenomena whereby social networking annotations are layered over broadband video to create highly interactive and immersive experiences between individuals and their content. Until early 2005 this was not considered viable due to the lack of web and broadband infrastructure designed to support the transmission of web video and the still nascent stage of social networks like MySpace and Facebook. The introduction of YouTube in February 2005 marked the first significant combination of broadband video and social network systems designed to allow users to share, rate and tag user generated and premium content. From 2006 to 2008 this trend continued to gain steam as individuals and businesses pursued new combinations of video and social networking across a wide range of entertainment, communication and learning applications. == Broadband video takes off == Video has largely been defined by its use as an entertainment medium. Since the commercial availability of the television in the late '30s video has become the dominant entertainment medium far eclipsing audio and text based entertainment both in terms of time and dollars spent. Within the past decade, video use has rapidly evolved across a broader range of devices, multiple locations and user applications. The popularization of the long-tail and user-generated video has further challenged people's ideas of what's possible with video. A key advantage of video relative to other media is its superior ability to communicate ideas and emotions economically. If a picture is worth a thousand words, then a video may be worth a thousand pictures. Video by its very nature is highly experiential, making communications more compelling, informative and memorable. == Social networking meets video == At the core of visual networking is the concept that people can participate in communities of content and communities of interest. A community of interest is defined as a community of people who share a common interest or passion. These people exchange ideas and thoughts about the given passion, but may know (or care) little about each other outside of this area. Participation in a community of interest can be compelling, entertaining and create a ‘sticky’ community where people return frequently and remain for extended periods. The unparalleled potential of the Internet to promote such connections is only now being fully recognized and exploited, through Web-based groups established for that purpose. Based on the six degrees of separation concept (the idea that any two people on the planet could make contact through a chain of no more than five intermediaries), social networking establishes interconnected Internet communities (sometimes known as personal networks) that help people make contacts that would be good for them to know, but that they would be unlikely to have met otherwise. == Transition from search to discovery == The phrase The Long Tail was, according to Chris Anderson, first coined by himself in October 2004. Anderson argued that products that are in low demand or have low sales volume can collectively make up a market share that rivals or exceeds the relatively few current bestsellers and blockbusters, if the store or distribution channel is large enough. The Long Tail also has implications for the producers of content; especially those whose products could not—for economic reasons—find a place in pre-Internet information distribution channels controlled by book publishers, record companies, movie studios, and television networks. Looked at from the producers' side, the Long Tail has made possible a flowering of creativity across all fields of human endeavor. One example of this is YouTube, where thousands of diverse videos—whose content, production value or lack of popularity make them inappropriate for traditional television—are easily accessible to a wide range of viewers. The benefit to the consumer is that they know have an almost infinite choice of content to select from able to create their own specific channels based upon their unique needs. A potential negative side effect of the long tail is the rapidly growing inventory of text, audio and video content. The storage and distribution systems of the past restricted the number of songs, video, and books making it easier to search for what was relevant to the individual. As the long-tail has grown, more and more relevant and irrelevant content passes an individual by without their knowledge. This is especially true for video because unlike text-based files which can searched and indexed for easy finding, video typically has only its title as a clue to what's in it. This lack of comprehensive meta-data has limited the applicability of traditional search models. Augmenting traditional search has been the emergence of content based discovery tools that make people aware of relevant content based upon their participation in communities of interest and/or communities of content. The idea is that users may or may not start out searching for something, but they soon begin reacting to things they find, exploring links on pages they stumble upon and taking cues from fellow surfers about where to go. Instead of the old, passive, lean-back style of watching video, viewers are actively seeking content through discovery. People interact with each other, posting comments on what they just saw. Many sites now allow people to vote on videos, ranking and rating them. Ranking is the result of one of a number of algorithms that measure how many people have watched something or how many sites link to it. == Early examples == YouTube is the best early example of a visual networking experience. YouTube is a video sharing website where users can upload, view and share video clips. Unregistered users can watch most videos on the site, while registered users are permitted to upload an unlimited number of videos. Few statistics are publicly available regarding the number of videos on YouTube. However, in July 2006, the company revealed that more than 100 million videos were being watched every day, and 2.5 billion videos were watched in June 2006. 50,000 videos were being added per day in May 2006, and this increased to 65,000 by July. In January 2008 alone, nearly 79 million users watched over 3 billion videos on YouTube. Telepresence refers to a set of technologies which allow a person to feel as if they were present, to give the appearance that they were present, or to have an effect, at a location other than their true location. Telepresence requires that the senses of the user, or users, are provided with such stimuli as to give the feeling of being in that other location. Additionally, the user(s) may be given the ability to affect the remote location. In this case, the user's position, movements, actions, voice, etc. may be sensed, transmitted and duplicated in the remote location to bring about this effect. Therefore, information may be traveling in both directions between the user and the remote location. Critical the creating an in-person experience is the presence of high-definition video perfectly synchronized with stereophonic sound. A minimum system usually includes visual feedback. Ideally, the entire field of view of the user is filled with a view of the remote location, and the viewpoint corresponds to the movement and orientation of the user's head. In this way, it differs from television or cinema, where the viewpoint is out of the control of the viewer. == Other applications == While still in its infancy, visual networking applications are beginning to emerge that span both consumer and business markets. === Mobile video === Proliferation of multi-function mobile devices, particularl

  Read more →
• 

  Media engagement framework

  The media engagement framework is a planning framework used by marketing professionals to understand the behavior of social media marketing-based audiences. The construct was introduced in the book, ROI of Social Media. Powell’s background in marketing ROI and Groves' experience and understanding of the applications of social media in business led to a collaboration. Dimos joined as a brand strategist for Litmus Group, a global management consulting firm. The media engagement framework consists of the definitions of personas (Individuals, Consumers and Influencers), referenced by the competitive set or constraint that applies to that persona and the measurement framework that might be applied to those personas. It is referenced at the center of the marketing process diagram, surrounded by the marketing functions of strategy, tactics, metrics and ROI. The marketing process diagram describes how the media engagement framework can apply to any strategic marketing activity but was developed to establish a completely integrated framework describing how both traditional and social media marketing activities can be planned, executed, measured and improved. == Application == The media engagement framework provides a strategic planning construct in which measurements and metrics play a crucial role. Applying the media engagement framework aids in the development and management of an effective online marketing presence leveraging social media to engage a market or audience. By first personifying the audience, the marketer is able to identify the limiting aspect of the engagements possible with that audience segment and then, understand the type of engagement metrics to apply. Each persona makes decisions differently about how he/she acts in the social media universe. A framework metric can be applied for each of these personas: Endorsement funnel for influencers Community engagement funnel for individuals Purchase funnel for consumers Individuals, influencers and consumers make decisions based on alternatives available to them and constraints put on them. To engage with an individual brands must realize they are competing against the time an individual spends on line. If they find something else more engaging, they will engage with that activity. Brands compete against other brands for the purchases of consumers acting in the category. Lastly, influencers have only so many endorsements they can make and therefore brands compete with other endorsers for the endorsement of an influencer. Creating engaging content by keeping target audience in mind like create content that audience find it funny, interesting, and relatable will encourage audience to share it on social networks. Which will be beneficial for you brand, getting more people to know about your business and brand. Contact Digilord to create engaging content for your brand. Use of listening tools (Google Alerts, Twitter Search, SocialMention.com, Veooz.com, Alterian SM2, Radian6, Sysomos, Buzzient etc.) can be employed within the model to help identify the members of the audience segment and to support the formation of other social engagement planning and management tools.

  Read more →