AI Face Verification Generator

AI Face Verification Generator — independent reviews, comparisons, pricing and step-by-step guides on Aizhi.

• 

  Mobile simulator

  A mobile simulator is a software application for a personal computer which creates a virtual machine version of a mobile device, such as a mobile phone, iPhone, other smartphone, or calculator, on the computer. This may sometimes also be termed an emulator. The mobile simulator allows the user to use features and run applications on the virtual mobile on their computer as though it was the actual mobile device. A mobile simulator lets you test a website and determine how well it performs on various types of mobile devices. A good simulator tests mobile content quickly on multiple browsers and emulates several device profiles simultaneously. This allows analysis of mobile content in real-time, locate errors in code, view rendering in an environment that simulates the mobile browser, and optimize the site for performance. Mobile simulators may be developed using programming languages such as Java, .NET and JavaScript.

  Read more →
• 

  Full Dive

  Full Dive, short for Full Dive: This Ultimate Next-Gen Full Dive RPG Is Even Shittier than Real Life! (Japanese: 究極進化したフルダイブRPGが現実よりもクソゲーだったら, Hepburn: Kyūkyoku Shinka shita Furu Daibu RPG ga Genjitsu yori mo Kusogē Dattara), is a Japanese light novel series written by Light Tuchihi and illustrated by Youta. Media Factory has published four volumes since August 2020 under their MF Bunko J imprint. A manga adaptation with art by Kino was serialized in Media Factory's seinen manga magazine Monthly Comic Alive from January 2021 to January 2022. An anime television series adaptation by ENGI aired from April to June 2021. == Plot == Hiroshi Yuki, with the player name of Hiro, is a high school boy who loves to play virtual reality MMORPGs (VRMMORPG) in order to escape reality. When a game store manager named Reona Kisaragi tricks him into buying the game Kiwame Quest, he soon discovers that it is not what it seems. Unlike regular games, it is a game that tries to pursue realism to a fanatical point. As such, Hiroshi struggles to eke out a niche. Despite the disadvantages, he is determined to complete the game. == Characters == === Main characters === Hiroshi Yuki (結城宏, Yūki Hiroshi) Voiced by: Daiki Yamashita, Riho Sugiyama (young) (Japanese); Johnny Yong Bosch, Michele Knotz (young) (English) Hiroshi is a high school student who is tricked into buying Kiwame Quest by game store manager, Reona Kisaragi. He is a former member of the track team who quit following an unfortunate incident and he likes to play VRMMORPGs in order to escape reality. His player name is Hiro. Reona Kisaragi (如月玲於奈, Kisaragi Reona) Voiced by: Ayana Taketatsu (Japanese); Natalie Van Sistine (English) Reona is a game store manager who tricks Hiroshi into buying Kiwame Quest. She likes to tease him and her in-game avatar is that of a fairy. Alicia (アリシア, Arishia) Voiced by: Fairouz Ai (Japanese); Kayli Mills (English) Alicia is one of Hiroshi's childhood friends in Kiwame Quest. She has an older brother named Martin in-game. Mizarisa (ミザリサ) Voiced by: Shiori Izawa (Japanese); Sarah Anne Williams (English) Mizarisa is the town inquisitor in Kiwame Quest. Kaede Yuki (結城楓, Yūki Kaede) Voiced by: Aoi Koga (Japanese); Kate Bristol (English) Kaede is Hiroshi's younger sister. She used to look up to her older brother, but their relationship has been strained ever since he quit the track team. === NPCs === Martin (マーチン, Māchin) Voiced by: Haruki Ishiya, Natsumi Fujiwara (young) (Japanese); Ben Lepley, Krystal LaPorte (young) (English) Martin is one of Hiroshi's childhood friends in Kiwame Quest. He is also Alicia's older brother in-game. Tesla (テスラ, Tesura) Voiced by: Satoshi Hino (Japanese); Jason Liebrecht (English) Tesla is the captain of the City Guard in Kiwame Quest. Govern (ガバン, Gaban) Voiced by: Shizuka Itō (Japanese); Lisa Ortiz (English) Govern is the queen of Ted in Kiwame Quest. === Other characters === Ginji (ギンジ) Voiced by: Katsuyuki Konishi (Japanese); Brent Mukai (English) Ginji is a veteran player of Kiwame Quest. Soichiro Kamui (神居宗一郎, Kamui Sōichirō) Voiced by: Yoshitsugu Matsuoka (Japanese); Samuel Drake (English) Kamui is the only known player who has successfully completed Kiwame Quest. == Media == === Light novels === Light Tuchihi launched the light novel series, with illustrations by Youta, under Media Factory's MF Bunko J label on August 25, 2020. ==== Volumes ==== === Manga === A manga adaptation by Kino was serialized in Media Factory's Monthly Comic Alive magazine from January 27, 2021, to January 27, 2022. Two tankōbon volumes were released from May 21, 2021, to January 21, 2022. ==== Volumes ==== === Anime === An anime television series adaptation was announced on December 4, 2020. The series was animated by ENGI and directed by Kazuya Miura, with Kenta Ihara writing the series' scripts, and Yūta Kevin Kenmotsu designing the characters. It ran from April 7 to June 23, 2021, on AT-X, Tokyo MX, SUN, KBS Kyoto, and BS11. Mayu Maeshima performed the opening theme "Answer", while Ayana Taketatsu, Fairouz Ai, Shiori Izawa, and Aoi Koga performed the ending theme "Kisuida!". It ran for 12 episodes. Funimation licensed and streamed the series. On June 8, 2021, Funimation announced that the series would receive an English dub, which premiered the following day. Following Sony's acquisition of Crunchyroll, the series was moved to Crunchyroll. ==== Episodes ====

  Read more →
• 

  The Eye of Mexico

  The Eye of Mexico (Spanish: El Ojo de México) is an outdoor sculpture in Mexico City. It is located in Ampliación Granada, Miguel Hidalgo, at the mixed-use development Neuchâtel Polanco, developed by the Canadian real estate company Ivanhoé Cambridge. The artwork was created by the Turkish artist Ferdi Alıcı and it was selected from among 350 proposals from artists from 35 countries. The project for The Eye of Mexico was developed by MIRA, a real estate investment and development company, and MASSIVart, a creative consulting agency. According to MIRA, upon its inauguration it became the first artwork in Latin America to use artificial intelligence (AI). The sculpture can read environmental and urban data using AI algorithms and transform the results into videos related to arts, science and technology. The ring was inaugurated on 20 May 2022 and it is 10 meters (33 ft) high and 3 meters (9.8 ft) wide.

  Read more →
• 

  Your AI Slop Bores Me

  Your AI Slop Bores Me (stylized in all lowercase) is a website and social experiment created by programmer Mihir Maroju. Serving as a parody of large language models (LLMs) like ChatGPT and Claude, all questions and image prompts posed by users are answered by other, randomly-selected human users of the site. As of March 2026, the site has reached 50 million hits and sits at 16,000 concurrent users. == Background == In an interview with Fast Company, Maroju said he was inspired to create the site by his frustration with AI proliferating the internet with AI generated content, saying the site came from "a frustration for AI art and its proliferation, making artists' lives worse and also just filling the internet with low-effort generic slop". == Overview == The site has a credit system, in which a first-time user will be given 1 credit for free. Every 10 minutes, if a user has 0 credits, they will receive 2 credits. Once the credits are used up, the user can no longer do prompts unless the user earns them. The user can earn credits by responding to other user's prompts by "larping as AI" while given a 75-second time limit. Prompts can either be for a written response, or a drawing for the other user to fulfill the prompt. The maximum amount of credits a user can have is 6 credits, and cannot exceed the maximum limit. If the prompting user activates "thinking mode", the countdown is extended to 150 seconds for the cost of 2 credits. == Reception == The site has garnered attention and praise from X users, and across many online communities. The Daily Dot's Rachel Kiley wrote that "the best part about the game is that there's really no right or wrong way to do it. Humans aren't LLMs trained on copyrighted material and the whole of the free internet, but we do retain a certain amount of the information we've learned from those things over the course of our lives, while also being capable of creativity". Chris Taylor of Mashable called the site "amateurish and charming". Aftermath's Nicole Carpenter wrote that the site reminded her of "the human touch of chaos".

  Read more →
• 

  Inverse consistency

  In image registration, inverse consistency measures the consistency of mappings between images produced by a registration algorithm. The inverse consistency error, introduced by Christiansen and Johnson in 2001, quantifies the distance between the composition of the mappings from each image to the other, produced by the registration procedure, and the identity function, and is used as a regularisation constraint in the loss function of many registration algorithms to enforce consistent mappings. Inverse consistency is necessary for good image registration but it is not sufficient, since a mapping can be perfectly consistent but not register the images at all. == Definition == Image registration is the process of establishing a common coordinate system between two images, and given two images I 1 : Ω 1 → R I 2 : Ω 2 → R {\displaystyle {\begin{aligned}I_{1}:\Omega _{1}\to \mathbb {R} \\I_{2}:\Omega _{2}\to \mathbb {R} \end{aligned}}} registering a source image I 1 {\displaystyle I_{1}} to a target image I 2 {\displaystyle I_{2}} consists of determining a transformation f 1 : Ω 2 → Ω 1 {\displaystyle f_{1}:\Omega _{2}\to \Omega _{1}} that maps points from the target space to the source space. An ideal registration algorithm should not be sensitive to which image in the pair is used as source or target, and the registration operator should be antisymmetric such that the mappings f 1 : Ω 2 → Ω 1 f 2 : Ω 1 → Ω 2 {\displaystyle {\begin{aligned}f_{1}:\Omega _{2}\to \Omega _{1}\\f_{2}:\Omega _{1}\to \Omega _{2}\end{aligned}}} produced when registering I 1 {\displaystyle I_{1}} to I 2 {\displaystyle I_{2}} and I 2 {\displaystyle I_{2}} to I 1 {\displaystyle I_{1}} respectively should be the inverse of each other, i.e. f 2 = f 1 − 1 {\displaystyle f_{2}=f_{1}^{-1}} and f 1 = f 2 − 1 {\displaystyle f_{1}=f_{2}^{-1}} or, equivalently, f 2 ∘ f 1 = id Ω 2 {\displaystyle f_{2}\circ f_{1}=\operatorname {id} _{\Omega _{2}}} and f 1 ∘ f 2 = id Ω 1 {\displaystyle f_{1}\circ f_{2}=\operatorname {id} _{\Omega _{1}}} , where ∘ {\displaystyle \circ } denotes the function composition operator. Real algorithms are not perfect, and when swapping the role of source and target image in a registration problem the so obtained transformations are not the inverse of each other. Inverse consistency can be enforced by adding to the loss function of the registration a symmetric regularisation term that penalises inconsistent transformations ∫ Ω 2 ‖ f 2 ( f 1 ( x ) ) − x ‖ 2 d x + ∫ Ω 1 ‖ f 1 ( f 2 ( x ) ) − x ‖ 2 d x . {\displaystyle \int _{\Omega _{2}}\left\Vert f_{2}(f_{1}(x))-x\right\Vert ^{2}\mathrm {d} x+\int _{\Omega _{1}}\left\Vert f_{1}(f_{2}(x))-x\right\Vert ^{2}\mathrm {d} x.} Inverse consistency can be used as a quality metric to evaluate image registration results. The inverse consistency error ( I C E {\displaystyle ICE} ) measures the distance between the composition of the two transforms and the identity function, and it can be formulated in terms of both average ( I C E a {\displaystyle ICE_{a}} ) or maximum ( I C E m {\displaystyle ICE_{m}} ) over a region of interest Ω {\displaystyle \Omega } of the image: I C E a = 1 ∫ Ω d x ∫ Ω ‖ f 2 ( f 1 ( x ) ) − x ‖ d x I C E m = max x ∈ Ω ‖ f 2 ( f 1 ( x ) ) − x ‖ . {\displaystyle {\begin{aligned}ICE_{a}&={\frac {1}{\int _{\Omega }\mathrm {d} x}}\int _{\Omega }\left\Vert f_{2}(f_{1}(x))-x\right\Vert \mathrm {d} x\\ICE_{m}&=\max _{x\in \Omega }\left\Vert f_{2}(f_{1}(x))-x\right\Vert .\end{aligned}}} While inverse consistency is a necessary property of good registration algorithms, inverse consistency error alone is not a sufficient metric to evaluate the quality of image registration results, since a perfectly consistent mapping, with no other constraint, may be not even close to correctly register a pair of images.

  Read more →
• 

  Fuzzy electronics

  Fuzzy electronics is an electronic technology that uses fuzzy logic, instead of the two-state Boolean logic more commonly used in digital electronics. Fuzzy electronics is fuzzy logic implemented on dedicated hardware. This is to be compared with fuzzy logic implemented in software running on a conventional processor. Fuzzy electronics has a wide range of applications, including control systems and artificial intelligence. == History == The first fuzzy electronic circuit was built by Takeshi Yamakawa et al. in 1980 using discrete bipolar transistors. The first industrial fuzzy application was in a cement kiln in Denmark in 1982. The first VLSI fuzzy electronics was by Masaki Togai and Hiroyuki Watanabe in 1984. In 1987, Yamakawa built the first analog fuzzy controller. The first digital fuzzy processors came in 1988 by Togai (Russo, pp. 2–6). In the early 1990s, the first fuzzy logic chips were presented to the public. Two companies which are Omron and NEC have announced the development of dedicated fuzzy electronic hardware in the year 1991. Two years later, the Japanese Omron Cooperation has shown a working fuzzy chip during a technical fair.

  Read more →
• 

  Blackboard system

  A blackboard system is an artificial intelligence approach based on the blackboard architectural model, where a common knowledge base, the "blackboard", is iteratively updated by a diverse group of specialist knowledge sources, starting with a problem specification and ending with a solution. Each knowledge source updates the blackboard with a partial solution when its internal constraints match the blackboard state. In this way, the specialists work together to solve the problem. The blackboard model was originally designed as a way to handle complex, ill-defined problems, where the solution is the sum of its parts. == Metaphor == The following scenario provides a simple metaphor that gives some insight into how a blackboard functions: A group of specialists are seated in a room with a large blackboard. They work as a team to brainstorm a solution to a problem, using the blackboard as the workplace for cooperatively developing the solution. The session begins when the problem specifications are written onto the blackboard. The specialists all watch the blackboard, looking for an opportunity to apply their expertise to the developing solution. When someone writes something on the blackboard that allows another specialist to apply their expertise, the second specialist records their contribution on the blackboard, hopefully enabling other specialists to then apply their expertise. This process of adding contributions to the blackboard continues until the problem has been solved. == Components == A blackboard-system application consists of three major components The software specialist modules, which are called knowledge sources (KSs). Like the human experts at a blackboard, each knowledge source provides specific expertise needed by the application. The blackboard, a shared repository of problems, partial solutions, suggestions, and contributed information. The blackboard can be thought of as a dynamic "library" of contributions to the current problem that have been recently "published" by other knowledge sources. The control shell, which controls the flow of problem-solving activity in the system. Just as the eager human specialists need a moderator to prevent them from trampling each other in a mad dash to grab the chalk, KSs need a mechanism to organize their use in the most effective and coherent fashion. In a blackboard system, this is provided by the control shell. === Learnable Task Modeling Language === A blackboard system is the central space in a multi-agent system. It's used for describing the world as a communication platform for agents. To realize a blackboard in a computer program, a machine readable notation is needed in which facts can be stored. One attempt in doing so is a SQL database, another option is the Learnable Task Modeling Language (LTML). The syntax of the LTML planning language is similar to PDDL, but adds extra features like control structures and OWL-S models. LTML was developed in 2007 as part of a much larger project called POIROT (Plan Order Induction by Reasoning from One Trial), which is a Learning from demonstrations framework for process mining. In POIROT, Plan traces and hypotheses are stored in the LTML syntax for creating semantic web services. Here is a small example: A human user is executing a workflow in a computer game. The user presses some buttons and interacts with the game engine. While the user interacts with the game, a plan trace is created. That means the user's actions are stored in a logfile. The logfile gets transformed into a machine readable notation which is enriched by semantic attributes. The result is a textfile in the LTML syntax which is put on the blackboard. Agents (software programs in the blackboard system) are able to parse the LTML syntax. == Implementations == We start by discussing two well known early blackboard systems, BB1 and GBB, below and then discuss more recent implementations and applications. The BB1 blackboard architecture was originally inspired by studies of how humans plan to perform multiple tasks in a trip, used task-planning as a simplified example of tactical planning for the Office of Naval Research. Hayes-Roth & Hayes-Roth found that human planning was more closely modeled as an opportunistic process, in contrast to the primarily top-down planners used at the time: While not incompatible with successive-refinement models, our view of planning is somewhat different. We share the assumption that planning processes operate in a two-dimensional planning space defined on time and abstraction dimensions. However, we assume that people's planning activity is largely opportunistic. That is, at each point in the process, the planner's current decisions and observations suggest various opportunities for plan development. The planner's subsequent decisions follow up on selected opportunities. Sometimes, these decision-sequences follow an orderly path and produce a neat top-down expansion as described above. However, some decisions and observations might also suggest less orderly opportunities for plan development. A key innovation of BB1 was that it applied this opportunistic planning model to its own control, using the same blackboard model of incremental, opportunistic, problem-solving that was applied to solve domain problems. Meta-level reasoning with control knowledge sources could then monitor whether planning and problem-solving were proceeding as expected or stalled. If stalled, BB1 could switch from one strategy to another as conditions – such as the goals being considered or the time remaining – changed. BB1 was applied in multiple domains: construction site planning, inferring 3-D protein structures from X-ray crystallography, intelligent tutoring systems, and real-time patient monitoring. BB1 also allowed domain-general language frameworks to be designed for wide classes of problems. For example, the ACCORD language framework defined a particular approach to solving configuration problems. The problem-solving approach was to incrementally assemble a solution by adding objects and constraints, one at a time. Actions in the ACCORD language framework appear as short English-like commands or sentences for specifying preferred actions, events to trigger KSes, preconditions to run a KS action, and obviation conditions to discard a KS action that is no longer relevant. GBB focused on efficiency, in contrast to BB1, which focused more on sophisticated reasoning and opportunistic planning. GBB improves efficiency by allowing blackboards to be multi-dimensional, where dimensions can be either ordered or not, and then by increasing the efficiency of pattern matching. GBB1, one of GBB's control shells implements BB1's style of control while adding efficiency improvements. Other well-known of early academic blackboard systems are the Hearsay II speech recognition system and Douglas Hofstadter's Copycat and Numbo projects. Some more recent examples of deployed real-world applications include: The PLAN component of the Mission Control System for RADARSAT-1, an Earth observation satellite developed by Canada to monitor environmental changes and Earth's natural resources. The GTXImage CAD software by GTX Corporation was developed in the early 1990s using a set of rulebases and neural networks as specialists operating on a blackboard system. Adobe Acrobat Capture (now discontinued), as it used a blackboard system to decompose and recognize image pages to understand the objects, text, and fonts on the page. This function is currently built into the retail version of Adobe Acrobat as "OCR Text Recognition". Details of a similar OCR blackboard for Farsi text are in the public domain. Blackboard systems are used routinely in many military C4ISTAR systems for detecting and tracking objects. Another example of current use is in Game AI, where they are considered a standard AI tool to help with adding AI to video games. == Recent developments == Blackboard-like systems have been constructed within modern Bayesian machine learning settings, using agents to add and remove Bayesian network nodes. In these 'Bayesian Blackboard' systems, the heuristics can acquire more rigorous probabilistic meanings as proposal and acceptances in Metropolis Hastings sampling though the space of possible structures. Conversely, using these mappings, existing Metropolis-Hastings samplers over structural spaces may now thus be viewed as forms of blackboard systems even when not named as such by the authors. Such samplers are commonly found in musical transcription algorithms for example. Blackboard systems have also been used to build large-scale intelligent systems for the annotation of media content, automating parts of traditional social science research. In this domain, the problem of integrating various AI algorithms into a single intelligent system arises spontaneously, with blackboards providing a way for a collection of distributed, modular natural language processing algorithm

  Read more →
• 

  YouNoodle

  YouNoodle, Inc. is a San Francisco-based company, with offices in Barcelona and Santiago, founded in 2010, building a platform for entrepreneurship competitions all over the world. YouNoodle matches entrepreneurs with competitions, accelerators, and startup programs, and provides a judging and voting SaaS platform to university, non-profit, government and enterprise clients organizing innovation challenges and competitions. Stanford's BASES, UC Berkeley LAUNCH, Start-Up Chile, Amazon Startup Challenge, and NASA are all running one or more competitions on YouNoodle's platform. == History and structure == YouNoodle was founded by Rebeca Hwang and Torsten Kolind in 2010. The company was spun off a project started by Bob Goodson (Quid) and Kirill Makharinsky (Enki) in 2007 with support from Peter Thiel (Founders Fund), Max Levchin (PayPal) and Charles Lho (Amicus Group), founding investor and Chairman of YouNoodle today. This project also spawned Quid (Goodson) and indirectly Ostrovok (Makharinsky). Although also named YouNoodle, this project/company was discontinued in 2010, when the three new entities started operations. The founders of the 2007-2010 entity were Goodson and Makharinsky, both former students of the University of Oxford. Goodson had studied medieval English literature before moving from Oxford to California when Levchin, the co-founder of PayPal, invited him to join a start-up there. Makharinsky's degree was in applied mathematics, and he was also encouraged to pursue opportunities in the United States by Levchin. Other significant employees included Hwang (co-founder of today's YouNoodle), a Stanford University doctoral student whose research is into social network theory. == Startup predictor == YouNoodle's now discontinued "Startup predictor", part of the 2007-2010 entity and developed by Makharinsky and Hwang, used mathematical models to predict the success of new businesses. The user fills in a questionnaire, which takes about half an hour to complete and concentrates on the business concept, finances, founders and advisers. Because the procedure was designed for new companies, questions on revenue and traffic are not included. The site then provided an estimate of what the company's value will be after three years and a score from 1 to 1000 representing its value as an investment. The service was free for the startups themselves, but YouNoodle intended to charge third parties for access to the results. The level of detail required by the questionnaire makes it difficult for people without inside knowledge of a company to provide the data for a prediction on their own. The company's founders have declined to explain the algorithm in detail, but state that it takes into account the entrepreneurs' experience, networks and mutual relations. Information provided by companies which use the site's networking features is used to improve the algorithm. As of August 2008, the algorithm was based on data from 3,000 startups. In the same month the company had four patents pending on the technology.

  Read more →
• 

  AI browser

  An AI browser is a web browser with integrated artificial intelligence capabilities, such as automatically summarizing web page content or answering questions about it. A more specialized type is an agentic browser, based on the concept of agentic AI, which can take actions – such as navigating webpages or filling out forms – on behalf of the user. Several agentic browsers emerged in 2025, including ChatGPT Atlas (macOS only), Comet, and Dia. As of 2025, this is a recent development in the browser market, including new entrants from OpenAI, Opera and Perplexity. The designation of 'AI browser' also includes established browsers that later added non-agentic AI features, such as Microsoft Edge with the Copilot chatbot, Google Chrome with the Gemini chatbot (for Windows desktop users in the US with their language set to English), and Firefox with multiple chatbot providers (such as ChatGPT, Claude, Copilot, Gemini, and Le Chat). AI browsers have been noted to be susceptible to prompt injection attacks. == Browser extensions and integrations == Rather than creating entirely new browsers, some AI browsing solutions integrate with existing browsers through extensions or companion applications. These tools add agentic capabilities to established browsers without requiring users to switch platforms. Examples include Composite, which functions as a cross-browser agent that works with Chrome, Edge, and other browsers to automate web-based tasks for workers. == Cloud-based implementations == Cloud-based implementations of AI browsers allow users to run automated browsing agents without local installation. These systems operate on remote servers using frameworks such as Puppeteer or Playwright. Examples include Browserbase, Browser-use and AI Browser. The AI typically parses the Document Object Model (DOM) to locate and interact with page elements, and may also analyze browser screenshots to interpret layout and structure. == Criticisms and dangers == AI browsers have been noted to be susceptible to being vulnerable to prompt injection attacks, in which the content of websites can be used to hijack the control of the browser. Multiple organisations have argued against using AI browsers due to this vulnerability. The United Kingdom national cyber security centre and Gartner consider them to be too risky for adoption by most organisations. A study by the CISPA Helmholtz Center and Saarland University concluded that this vulnerability makes them easy targets for malware, fraud, automated defamation, disinformation and biased outputs.

  Read more →
• 

  Jake Elwes

  Jake Elwes () is a British media artist, hacker and researcher. Their practice is the exploration of artificial intelligence (AI), queer theory and technical biases. They are known for using AI to create art in mediums such as video, performance and installation. Elwes considers themselves to be neuroqueer, and their work on queering technology addresses issues caused by the normative biases of artificial intelligence. == Education and early life == Elwes was born in London to British contemporary artist and painter Luke Elwes and Anneke, daughter of Hans Dumoulin. Elwes is the great grandchild of Army officer James Hennessy and portrait painter Simon Elwes RA, son of Victorian opera singer Gervase Elwes. Elwes studied at the Slade School of Fine Art from 2013 to 2017, where they began using computer code as a medium. In 2016 they attended the School of Machines, Making & Make-Believe in Berlin with artist and educator Gene Kogan. Elwes was introduced to drag performance by their collaborator Dr Joe Parslow who holds a PhD in drag performance. Drag performance has since become instrumental to Elwes' work. == Career == Elwes' work with artificial intelligence is cited as a hopeful strategy to make AI more playful and diverse. Elwes' work has been exhibited in numerous international art museums and galleries and was featured in a BBC documentary on the history of video art, they were a 2021 finalist for the Lumen Prize, and received the Honorary Mention of the 2022 Prix Ars Electronica in the Interactive Art + category. They also curated and presented the opening provocation "The New Real - Artistic and Queer Visions of AI Futures" to the UK government with two drag artists at the AI UK conference 2024. Elwes is part of the Radical Faeries countercultural movement. They have exhibited in museums and galleries across Europe and Asia including: Victoria and Albert Museum (London, UK) - The Zizi Show (2023-2024) for the first digital commission in their photography center's digital gallery Pinakothek der Moderne (Munich, Germany) - Glitch. Die Kunst Der Störung (2023-2024) ZKM (Karlsruhe, Germany) - Biomedia (2021-2022) National Museum of Modern and Contemporary Art (Cheongju, South Korea) - What an Artificial World (2024) Somerset House (London, UK) - The Horror Show! (2022-2023) Gazelli Art House (London, UK) - Jake Elwes: Data • Glitch • Utopia (2023) (survey exhibition) Jut Art Museum (Taipei, Taiwan) - Future Lives, Future You (2023-2024) Max Ernst Museum (Brühl, Germany) - Surreal Futures (2023-2024) Zabludowicz Collection (London, UK) - Among the Machines (2022) Ars Electronica (Linz, Austria) - Prix Ars Electronica, CyberArts Exhibition (2022) Institute of Contemporary Arts (ICA) (London, UK) - Do Androids Dream on Silver Screens? (2023) Arebyte gallery (London, UK) - Real-Time Constraints (2020) Ming Contemporary Art Museum (McaM) (Shanghai, China) - Mind the Deep (2019) HMKV (Hartware MedienKunstVerein) (Dortmund, Germany) - House of Mirrors: Artificial Intelligence as Phantasm (2022) Today Art Museum (Beijing, China) - Future of Today: DEJA VU (2019) Science Gallery (Dublin, Ireland) - BIAS (2021-2022) Yuz Museum (Shanghai, China) - Lying Sophia and Mocking Alexa (2021) Fotomuseum Winterthur The Onassis Foundation (Athens, Greece) - You and AI (2021) Royal College of Art (London, UK) - Event Two (2019) (50th anniversary of Computer Arts Society & Event One) Museum für Naturkunde (Berlin, Germany) - Forschungsfall Nachtigall (2019) Frankfurter Kunstverein (Frankfurt, Germany) - I am here to learn (2018) Nature Morte (Delhi, India) - Gradient Descent (2018) BALTIC Centre for Contemporary Art (Newcastle, UK) - Bloomberg New Contemporaries (2017) == Artworks == === The Zizi Project - a deepfake drag cabaret === The Zizi Project is a series of works that explore the interaction of drag and A.I. Currently, The Zizi Project is made up of multiple artworks. ==== Zizi - Queering the Dataset (2019) ==== Knowing that facial recognition technology statically struggle to recognize black women or transgender people, Elwes set out to "Queer the Dataset" through an open-sourced generative adversarial network (GAN, a type of machine learning model and an early Generative artificial intelligence). Elwes added a dataset of 1,000 photos of drag kings and queens into the GAN's 70,000 faces collected in a standardised facial recognition dataset called Flickr-Faces-HQ Dataset (FFHQ). They then created new simulacra faces, known as deep fakes. "We queer that data so it shifts all of the weights in this neural network from a space of normativity into a space of queerness and otherness. Suddenly all of the faces start to break down and you see mascara dissolve into lipstick and blue eye shadow turn into a pink wig" said Elwes in a 2023 interview for Artnet. ==== Zizi & Me (2020–2023) ==== Zizi & Me is an ongoing multimedia collaboration between drag queen Me The Drag Queen and a deepfake A.I. clone of Me The Drag Queen. Using neural networks trained on filmed footage, the project creates a virtual body that can mimic reference movements. The first act, which features a digital lip-sync duet to Anything You Can Do (I Can Do Better), satirises the idea of A.I. being mistaken for a human, using drag performance and cabaret to critique societal narratives about A.I. and its role in shaping identity. The project is part of The Zizi Project by Jake Elwes, which explores the intersection of drag performance and A.I. ==== The Zizi Show - A Deepfake Drag Cabaret (2020) ==== The Zizi Show is a deep fake drag act based on artificial intelligence (AI). It has been presented live and as interactive online artwork. It is an exploration of queer culture and the algorithms philosophy and ethics of AI. The Zizi Show was exhibited as the inaugural exhibition in the digital gallery at the V&A’s Photography Center from 2023 to 2024. ==== Zizi in Motion: A Deepfake Drag Utopia (Movement by Wet Mess) (2023) ==== "Zizi in Motion" is a multichannel silent video installation featuring AI-generated deepfake performances, which are dynamically re-animated through the movements of London drag artist Wet Mess. The movements of Wet Mess cause the AI-generated visuals to glitch and distort, showcasing the interaction between drag performance and artificial intelligence. The work explore the potential for queer communities to ethically and creatively reclaim and repurpose deepfake technology, using it to celebrate queer bodies and identities. === Art in the Cage of Digital Reproduction (2024) === In an act of protest on 26 November 2024, Elwes facilitated indirect access to an early access token for OpenAI’s Sora text-to-video model through a Hugging Face frontend under the account "PR Puppets". The accompanying statement called to 'denormalize the exploitation of artists by major AI companies for training data, R&D, and publicity'. The incident attracted international press coverage calling into question the role of artists in shaping the future of generative AI versus merely serving as data and credibility providers for tech giants. Elwes also coordinated a collection of mini essays with responses and reflections from the signees and guest writers titled "Art in the Cage of Digital Reproduction". === Installations exploring interpretation and feedback loops between neural networks === Elwes has created works based on the interpretations and misinterpretations between different neural networks and training datasets including: A.I. Interprets A.I. Interpreting ‘Against Interpretation’ (Sontag 1966) from 2023, Closed Loop from 2017, and Auto-Encoded Buddha from 2016. ==== A.I. Interprets A.I. Interpreting ‘Against Interpretation’ (Sontag 1966) (2023) ==== A.I. Interprets A.I. Interpreting ‘Against Interpretation (Sontag 1966) is a three-channel video artwork where an AI interprets Susan Sontag’s essay into images, and then and another AI reinterprets those images back into language. The piece highlights how AI-generated art can misinterpret and introduce bias. ==== Closed Loop (2017) ==== Closed Loop is a two-channel video where two neural networks engage in a continuous feedback loop, one generating images based on the text output and the other creating text based on the image output. The work explores how AI models misinterpret and evolve in a surreal, self-perpetuating conversation, without human input. ==== Auto-Encoded Buddha (2016) ==== Auto-Encoded Buddha is a mixed-media piece where an AI attempts to generate an image of a Buddha statue, trained on 5,000 Buddha images. The AI struggles to accurately represent the Buddha, highlighting the limitations of early generative neural networks. The work is a tribute to Nam June Paik’s TV Buddha (1974). === CUSP (2019) === In their video work CUSP (2019) Elwes places marsh birds generated using artificial intelligence into a tidal landscape. These digitally generated and constantly shifting birds are recorded in dialogue with native

  Read more →
• 

  A.I. Insight forums

  The Artificial Intelligence Insight forums, also known as the A.I. Insight forums, are a series of forums to build consensus on how the United States Congress should craft A.I. legislation. Organized by Senate Majority Leader Charles "Chuck" Schumer, the first of nine closed-door forums convened on September 13, 2023. == Background == Amid a surge in the popularity and advancement of artificial intelligence, senator Chuck Schumer launched an effort to establish a framework for the regulation of A.I. in April 2023. By the end of June, a preliminary framework – dubbed the "SAFE Innovation Framework" – was established and presented to Congress. Schumer also announced a series of forums wherein tech leaders who were well-acquainted with A.I. would help to "educate" Congress on the risks and problems that A.I. poses. Many tech leaders including Sam Altman, Elon Musk, and Sundar Pichai were set to attend the meetings. Many U.S. lawmakers and senators such as Mike Rounds and Todd Young were also set to attend. == September 13 forum == The overarching consensus following the conclusion of the September 13 forum was that there "should be" regulations regarding the use and advancement of A.I., but it should not be made "too fast". Many tech executives who attended the forum also warned senators of the risks and threats that A.I. could pose. Musk, who attended the forum, stated afterwards that there was "overwhelming consensus" on the regulation of A.I. === Invitees === This is a list of people who were invited to attend the September 13 forum. Elon Musk (Tesla, SpaceX, X Corp.) Sam Altman (OpenAI) Bill Gates (ex–Microsoft) Jensen Huang (Nvidia) Alex Karp (Palantir) Satya Nadella (Microsoft) Arvind Krishna (IBM) Sundar Pichai (Alphabet Inc., Google) Eric Schmidt (ex–Google) Mark Zuckerberg (Meta) Charles Rivkin (Motion Picture Association) Liz Shuler (AFL-CIO) Meredith Stiehm (Writers Guild of America) Randi Weingarten (American Federation of Teachers) Maya Wiley (LCCHR) == October 24 forum == The second of nine forums was hosted on October 24, 2023, as federal A.I. regulation drew nearer. According to Schumer's office, the forum was centered mainly on how A.I. could "enable innovation", and the innovation that is needed for the safe progression of A.I. At the forum, Senators Brian Schatz and John Kennedy introduced the "Schatz-Kennedy A.I. Labeling Act", a new piece of A.I. legislation that would provide "more transparency on A.I.-generated content". Following the forum, Senator Rounds stated that in order to fuel the development of A.I., a total estimated $56 billion would be needed for the next three years. Rounds, alongside Senator Young and Schumer, also highlighted the need to outcompete China and workforce initiatives. === Invitees === 21 people were invited to attend the forum, and were composed largely of venture capitalists, academics, civil rights campaigners, and industry figures. Some key figures included venture capitalists Marc Andreessen and John Doerr. == Future == Over the course of fall 2023, there is slated to be a total of nine forums on the topic of A.I., with the first hosted on September 13.

  Read more →
• 

  AI@50

  AI@50, formally known as the "Dartmouth Artificial Intelligence Conference: The Next Fifty Years" (July 13–15, 2006), was a conference organized by James H. Moor, commemorating the 50th anniversary of the Dartmouth workshop which effectively inaugurated the history of artificial intelligence. Five of the original ten attendees were present: Marvin Minsky, Ray Solomonoff, Oliver Selfridge, Trenchard More, and John McCarthy. While sponsored by Dartmouth College, General Electric, and the Frederick Whittemore Foundation, a $200,000 grant from the Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency (DARPA) called for a report of the proceedings that would: Analyze progress on AI's original challenges during the first 50 years, and assess whether the challenges were "easier" or "harder" than originally thought and why Document what the AI@50 participants believe are the major research and development challenges facing this field over the next 50 years, and identify what breakthroughs will be needed to meet those challenges Relate those challenges and breakthroughs against developments and trends in other areas such as control theory, signal processing, information theory, statistics, and optimization theory. A summary report by the conference director, James H. Moor, was published in AI Magazine. == Conference Program and links to published papers == James H. Moor, conference Director, Introduction Carol Folt and Barry Scherr, Welcome Carey Heckman, Tonypandy and the Origins of Science === AI: Past, Present, Future === John McCarthy, What Was Expected, What We Did, and AI Today Marvin Minsky, The Emotion Machine === The Future Model of Thinking === Ron Brachman and Hector Levesque, A Large Part of Human Thought David Mumford, What is the Right Model for 'Thought'? Stuart Russell, The Approach of Modern AI === The Future of Network Models === Geoffrey Hinton & Simon Osindero, From Pandemonium to Graphical Models and Back Again Rick Granger, From Brain Circuits to Mind Manufacture === The Future of Learning & Search === Oliver Selfridge, Learning and Education for Software: New Approaches in Machine Learning Ray Solomonoff, Machine Learning — Past and Future Leslie Pack Kaelbling, Learning to be Intelligent Peter Norvig, Web Search as a Product of and Catalyst for AI === The Future of AI === Rod Brooks, Intelligence and Bodies Nils Nilsson, Routes to the Summit Eric Horvitz, In Pursuit of Artificial Intelligence: Reflections on Challenges and Trajectories === The Future of Vision === Eric Grimson, Intelligent Medical Image Analysis: Computer Assisted Surgery and Disease Monitoring Takeo Kanade, Artificial Intelligence Vision: Progress and Non-Progress Terry Sejnowski, A Critique of Pure Vision === The Future of Reasoning === Alan Bundy, Constructing, Selecting and Repairing Representations of Knowledge Edwina Rissland, The Exquisite Centrality of Examples Bart Selman, The Challenge and Promise of Automated Reasoning === The Future of Language and Cognition === Trenchard More The Birth of Array Theory and Nial Eugene Charniak, Why Natural Language Processing is Now Statistical Natural Language Processing Pat Langley, Intelligent Behavior in Humans and Machines === The Future of the Future === Ray Kurzweil, Why We Can Be Confident of Turing Test Capability Within a Quarter Century George Cybenko, The Future Trajectory of AI Charles J. Holland, DARPA's Perspective === AI and Games === Jonathan Schaeffer, Games as a Test-bed for Artificial Intelligence Research Danny Kopec, Chess and AI Shay Bushinsky, Principle Positions in Deep Junior's Development === Future Interactions with Intelligent Machines === Daniela Rus, Making Bodies Smart Sherry Turkle, From Building Intelligences to Nurturing Sensibilities === Selected Submitted Papers: Future Strategies for AI === J. Storrs Hall, Self-improving AI: An Analysis Selmer Bringsjord, The Logicist Manifesto Vincent C. Müller, Is There a Future for AI Without Representation? Kristinn R. Thórisson, Integrated A.I. Systems === Selected Submitted Papers: Future Possibilities for AI === Eric Steinhart, Survival as a Digital Ghost Colin T. A. Schmidt, Did You Leave That 'Contraption' Alone With Your Little Sister? Michael Anderson & Susan Leigh Anderson, The Status of Machine Ethics Marcello Guarini, Computation, Coherence, and Ethical Reasoning

  Read more →
• 

  Randomized Hough transform

  Hough transforms are techniques for object detection, a critical step in many implementations of computer vision, or data mining from images. Specifically, the Randomized Hough transform is a probabilistic variant to the classical Hough transform, and is commonly used to detect curves (straight line, circle, ellipse, etc.) The basic idea of Hough transform (HT) is to implement a voting procedure for all potential curves in the image, and at the termination of the algorithm, curves that do exist in the image will have relatively high voting scores. Randomized Hough transform (RHT) is different from HT in that it tries to avoid conducting the computationally expensive voting process for every nonzero pixel in the image by taking advantage of the geometric properties of analytical curves, and thus improve the time efficiency and reduce the storage requirement of the original algorithm. == Motivation == Although Hough transform (HT) has been widely used in curve detection, it has two major drawbacks: First, for each nonzero pixel in the image, the parameters for the existing curve and redundant ones are both accumulated during the voting procedure. Second, the accumulator array (or Hough space) is predefined in a heuristic way. The more accuracy needed, the higher parameter resolution should be defined. These two needs usually result in a large storage requirement and low speed for real applications. Therefore, RHT was brought up to tackle this problem. == Implementation == In comparison with HT, RHT takes advantage of the fact that some analytical curves can be fully determined by a certain number of points on the curve. For example, a straight line can be determined by two points, and an ellipse (or a circle) can be determined by three points. The case of ellipse detection can be used to illustrate the basic idea of RHT. The whole process generally consists of three steps: Fit ellipses with randomly selected points. Update the accumulator array and corresponding scores. Output the ellipses with scores higher than some predefined threshold. === Ellipse fitting === One general equation for defining ellipses is: a ( x − p ) 2 + 2 b ( x − p ) ( y − q ) + c ( y − q ) 2 = 1 {\displaystyle a(x-p)^{2}+2b(x-p)(y-q)+c(y-q)^{2}=1} with restriction: a c − b 2 > 0 {\displaystyle ac-b^{2}>0} However, an ellipse can be fully determined if one knows three points on it and the tangents in these points. RHT starts by randomly selecting three points on the ellipse. Let them be X 1 {\displaystyle X_{1}} , X 2 {\displaystyle X_{2}} and X 3 {\displaystyle X_{3}} . The first step is to find the tangents of these three points. They can be found by fitting a straight line using least squares technique for a small window of neighboring pixels. The next step is to find the intersection points of the tangent lines. This can be easily done by solving the line equations found in the previous step. Then let the intersection points be T 12 {\displaystyle T_{12}} and T 23 {\displaystyle T_{23}} , the midpoints of line segments X 1 X 2 {\displaystyle X_{1}X_{2}} and X 2 X 3 {\displaystyle X_{2}X_{3}} be M 12 {\displaystyle M_{12}} and M 23 {\displaystyle M_{23}} . Then the center of the ellipse will lie in the intersection of T 12 M 12 {\displaystyle T_{12}M_{12}} and T 23 M 23 {\displaystyle T_{23}M_{23}} . Again, the coordinates of the intersected point can be determined by solving line equations and the detailed process is skipped here for conciseness. Let the coordinates of ellipse center found in previous step be ( x 0 , y 0 ) {\displaystyle (x_{0},y_{0})} . Then the center can be translated to the origin with x ′ = x − x 0 {\displaystyle x'=x-x_{0}} and y ′ = y − y 0 {\displaystyle y'=y-y_{0}} so that the ellipse equation can be simplified to: a x ′ 2 + 2 b x ′ y ′ + c y ′ 2 = 1 {\displaystyle ax'^{2}+2bx'y'+cy'^{2}=1} Now we can solve for the rest of ellipse parameters: a {\displaystyle a} , b {\displaystyle b} and c {\displaystyle c} by substituting the coordinates of X 1 {\displaystyle X_{1}} , X 2 {\displaystyle X_{2}} and X 3 {\displaystyle X_{3}} into the equation above. === Accumulating === With the ellipse parameters determined from previous stage, the accumulator array can be updated correspondingly. Different from classical Hough transform, RHT does not keep "grid of buckets" as the accumulator array. Rather, it first calculates the similarities between the newly detected ellipse and the ones already stored in accumulator array. Different metrics can be used to calculate the similarity. As long as the similarity exceeds some predefined threshold, replace the one in the accumulator with the average of both ellipses and add 1 to its score. Otherwise, initialize this ellipse to an empty position in the accumulator and assign a score of 1. === Termination === Once the score of one candidate ellipse exceeds the threshold, it is determined as existing in the image (in other words, this ellipse is detected), and should be removed from the image and accumulator array so that the algorithm can detect other potential ellipses faster. The algorithm terminates when the number of iterations reaches a maximum limit or all the ellipses have been detected. Pseudo code for RHT: while (we find ellipses AND not reached the maximum epoch) { for (a fixed number of iterations) { Find a potential ellipse. if (the ellipse is similar to an ellipse in the accumulator) then Replace the one in the accumulator with the average of two ellipses and add 1 to the score; else Insert the ellipse into an empty position in the accumulator with a score of 1; } Select the ellipse with the best score and save it in a best ellipse table; Eliminate the pixels of the best ellipse from the image; Empty the accumulator; }

  Read more →
• 

  Dartmouth workshop

  The Dartmouth Summer Research Project on Artificial Intelligence was a 1956 summer workshop widely considered to be the founding event of artificial intelligence as a field. The workshop has been referred to as "the Constitutional Convention of AI". The project's four organizers, Claude Shannon, John McCarthy, Nathaniel Rochester and Marvin Minsky, are considered some of the "founding fathers" of AI. However it was not the first conference devoted to what would now be described as the question of artificial intelligence: it postdated meetings such as the 1951 Paris cybernetics conference and the Macy meetings. The project lasted approximately six to eight weeks and consisted largely of brainstorming sessions. Eleven mathematicians and scientists originally planned to attend; not all of them attended, but more than ten others came for short times. == Background == In the early 1950s, there were various names for the field of "thinking machines": cybernetics, automata theory, and complex information processing. The variety of names suggests the variety of conceptual orientations. In 1955, John McCarthy, then a young Assistant Professor of Mathematics at Dartmouth College, decided to organize a group to clarify and develop ideas about thinking machines. He picked the name 'Artificial Intelligence' for the new field. He chose the name partly for its neutrality; avoiding a focus on narrow automata theory, and avoiding cybernetics which was heavily focused on analog feedback, as well as him potentially having to accept the assertive Norbert Wiener as guru or having to argue with him. In early 1955, McCarthy approached the Rockefeller Foundation to request funding for a summer seminar at Dartmouth for about 10 participants. In June, he and Claude Shannon, a founder of information theory then at Bell Labs, met with Robert Morison, Director of Biological and Medical Research to discuss the idea and possible funding, though Morison was unsure whether money would be made available for such a visionary project. On September 2, 1955, the project was formally proposed by McCarthy, Marvin Minsky, Nathaniel Rochester and Claude Shannon. The proposal is credited with introducing the term 'artificial intelligence'. The Proposal states: We propose that a 2-month, 10-man study of artificial intelligence be carried out during the summer of 1956 at Dartmouth College in Hanover, New Hampshire. The study is to proceed on the basis of the conjecture that every aspect of learning or any other feature of intelligence can in principle be so precisely described that a machine can be made to simulate it. An attempt will be made to find how to make machines use language, form abstractions and concepts, solve kinds of problems now reserved for humans, and improve themselves. We think that a significant advance can be made in one or more of these problems if a carefully selected group of scientists work on it together for a summer. The proposal goes on to discuss computers, natural language processing, neural networks, theory of computation, abstraction and creativity (these areas within the field of artificial intelligence are considered still relevant to the work of the field). On May 26, 1956, McCarthy notified Robert Morison of the planned 11 attendees: For the full period: 1) Dr. Marvin Minsky 2) Dr. Julian Bigelow 3) Professor D.M. Mackay 4) Mr. Ray Solomonoff 5) Mr. John Holland 6) Dr. John McCarthy For four weeks: 7) Dr. Claude Shannon 8) Mr. Nathaniel Rochester 9) Mr. Oliver Selfridge For the first two weeks: 10) Dr. Allen Newell 11) Professor Herbert Simon He noted, "we will concentrate on a problem of devising a way of programming a calculator to form concepts and to form generalizations. This of course is subject to change when the group gets together." The actual participants came at different times, mostly for much shorter times. Trenchard More replaced Rochester for three weeks and MacKay and Holland did not attend—but the project was set to begin. Around June 18, 1956, the earliest participants (perhaps only Ray Solomonoff, maybe with Tom Etter) arrived at the Dartmouth campus in Hanover, N.H., to join John McCarthy who already had an apartment there. Solomonoff and Minsky stayed at Professors' apartments, but most would stay at the Hanover Inn. == Dates == The Dartmouth Workshop is usually said to have run for six weeks. Ray Solomonoff's notes taken during the workshop, however, indicate that it ran for roughly eight weeks, from about June 18 to August 17. Solomonoff's notes start on June 22; June 28 mentions Minsky, June 30 mentions Hanover, N.H., July 1 mentions Tom Etter. On August 17, Solomonoff gave a final talk. == Participants == Initially, McCarthy lost his list of attendees. Instead, after the workshop, McCarthy sent Solomonoff a preliminary list of participants and visitors plus those interested in the subject. 47 people were listed. Solomonoff, however, made a list of participants in his notes of the summer project: Ray Solomonoff Marvin Minsky John McCarthy Claude Shannon Trenchard More Nat Rochester Oliver Selfridge Julian Bigelow W. Ross Ashby W.S. McCulloch Abraham Robinson Tom Etter John Nash David Sayre Arthur Samuel Kenneth R. Shoulders Shoulders' friend Alex Bernstein Herbert Simon Allen Newell Shannon attended Solomonoff's talk on July 10 and Bigelow gave a talk on August 15. Solomonoff doesn't mention Bernard Widrow, but in 1994 Widrow said that he and an unidentified colleague from the same lab in MIT had attended for one week. In the same interview Widrow recalled that "I think [Wesley] Clark and [Belmont] Farley were there from Lincoln Lab." Trenchard mentions R. Culver and Solomonoff mentions Bill Shutz. Herb Gelernter didn't attend, but was influenced later by what Rochester learned. In an article in IEEE Spectrum, Grace Solomonoff additionally identifies Peter Milner in a photo taken by Nathaniel Rochester in front of Dartmouth Hall. Ray Solomonoff, Marvin Minsky, and John McCarthy were the only three who stayed for the full time. Trenchard took attendance during two weeks of his three-week visit. From three to about eight people would attend the daily sessions. == Event and aftermath == They had the entire top floor of the Dartmouth Math Department to themselves, and most weekdays they would meet at the main math classroom where someone might lead a discussion focusing on his ideas, or more frequently, a general discussion would be held. It was not a directed group research project; discussions covered many topics, but several directions are considered to have been initiated or encouraged by the Workshop: the rise of symbolic methods, systems focused on limited domains (early expert systems), and deductive systems versus inductive systems. One participant, Arthur Samuel, said, "It was very interesting, very stimulating, very exciting". Ray Solomonoff kept notes giving his impression of the talks and the ideas from various discussions. === McCarthy's 1956 AI distribution list === This is the list in the "People Interested in the Artificial Intelligence Problem" document which McCarthy produced in 1956, partly in lieu of a list of attendees at the Dartmouth workshop. According to McCarthy the list was "being sent to the people on the list and a few others", and its purpose was "to let those on it know who is interested in receiving documents on the problem" of artificial intelligence. McCarthy also promised to deliver them a report on the Dartmouth conference, and to send an updated list soon afterwards. It includes people who did not attend the conference and does not include everyone who did attend it.

  Read more →
• 

  We Appreciate Power

  "We Appreciate Power" is a song by Canadian musician Grimes, featuring American musician Hana. It was released on November 29, 2018, billed as the lead single from her fifth studio album Miss Anthropocene, however it is only available on the Japanese and deluxe releases. The song was written and produced by Grimes, Poppy (originally), Hana and Chris Greatti. == Background and release == The song was supposed to be one of two collaborations between Grimes and American singer Poppy, for the latter's second studio album Am I a Girl?. In an interview, Poppy mentioned that she wrote two songs with Grimes; one about "destroying things" and another about "power". The other song, "Play Destroy", was featured on the album. Grimes shared a lyric of the song with a photo of her with Poppy on Twitter in May 2018. Following feuds between the two singers, the song was released by Grimes featuring singer Hana instead. On November 26, Grimes announced she would be releasing new music on November 29. Two days later, she revealed that the single is titled "We Appreciate Power" and features Hana, and shared the artwork. The release of the song was accompanied by a lyric video directed by Grimes and her brother Mac Boucher. == Music and lyrics == "We Appreciate Power" is an industrial rock, nu metal, and techno-industrial song. The track is regarded as a further step into Grimes's experimentation with guitars that started on 2015's Art Angels. The track was compared to the works of Nine Inch Nails; Jillian Mapes of Pitchfork described the song as "an immediate onslaught of mutilated noise—distorted metal guitar chug, bloody screams, a guitar loop that conjures fear and demands worship. Flashes of Nine Inch Nails' Pretty Hate Machine reverberate through the drum programming and synths." Brendan Klinkenberg of Rolling Stone placed the song "somewhere between power pop and straightforward industrial (with an extended bridge reminiscent of the most sweeping moments in a Final Fantasy score)" and "a distinctly 2018 take on Nine Inch Nails-esque hard-edged rock." A press release stated that the song was inspired by the North Korean band Moranbong and was written "from the perspective of a Pro-A.I. Girl Group Propaganda machine who use song, dance, sex and fashion to spread goodwill towards Artificial Intelligence." In addition Grimes stated that by simply listening to the song you will be reducing your risk of ending up on any future AI overlord's hit list when it reigns supreme, mirroring the Roko's basilisk theory. Lyrically, the song touches on transhumanist ideas such as the betterment and future of the human race, the possibilities of merging consciousness with machines to extend life indefinitely through mind uploading, and the idea that reality may be simulated. The song's chorus generated a spike in interest in the word "capitulate". == Critical reception == Pitchfork critic Jillian Mapes wrote: "If "Freak on a Leash" isn't a dealbreaker, then the supervillain allure of "We Appreciate Power" might pull you in (it legitimately slaps), but it just as well may leave you weighed down by Grimes' commitment to the absolute darkest timeline." Billboard's Gil Kaufman described the song as "a dystopian, aggressive dive into a more rock-leaning sound." Similarly, Brendan Klinkenberg of Rolling Stone called it "the most aggressive single Grimes has released to date" Noisey called the song "an absolute motherfucker of a single" and opined it sounds "like a K-pop band covering nu-metal". Justin Kamp of Paste described the track as a "glitchy empowerment anthem that chugs along on screeching synths and Grimes' repeated exultations of power." == Personnel == Credits adapted from Tidal. Grimes – vocals, guitar, production, engineering Hana – vocals, guitar, additional production Chris Greatti – guitar, keyboards, production, engineering Zakk Cervini – mixing == Track listing == == Charts ==

  Read more →