AI For Business Owners Course

AI For Business Owners Course — independent reviews, comparisons, pricing and step-by-step guides on Aizhi.

• 

  Superintelligence ban

  Superintelligence ban refers to proposed legal, ethical, or policy measures intended to restrict or prohibit the development of artificial superintelligence, AI systems that would surpass human cognitive abilities in nearly all domains. The idea arises from concerns that such systems could become uncontrollable, potentially posing existential threats to humanity or causing severe social and economic disruption. == Background == The concept of limiting or banning superintelligence research has roots in early 21st-century debates on artificial general intelligence (AGI) safety. Thinkers such as Nick Bostrom and Eliezer Yudkowsky warned that self-improving AI could rapidly exceed human oversight. As advanced models like large-scale language models and autonomous agents began demonstrating complex reasoning abilities, policymakers and ethicists increasingly discussed the need for legal constraints on the creation of systems capable of recursive self-improvement. In October 2025, the Future of Life Institute published a statement calling for "a prohibition on the development of superintelligence, not lifted before there is broad scientific consensus that it will be done safely and controllably, and strong public buy-in." This statement was signed by various public personalities, such as Richard Branson and Steve Wozniak, and AI experts, such as Yoshua Bengio and Geoffrey Hinton. == Rationale == Supporters of a superintelligence ban argue that once AI systems surpass human intelligence, traditional containment, alignment, and control methods may fail. They contend that even limited experimentation with such systems could lead to irreversible outcomes, including loss of human decision-making power or unintended global harm. Some propose international treaties modeled after the nuclear non-proliferation framework to prevent a competitive AI arms race. Opponents argue that a ban would be difficult to define and enforce, given the lack of a precise threshold distinguishing advanced AGI from superintelligence. They also warn that excessive restriction could slow scientific progress, hinder beneficial automation, and encourage unregulated underground research. == Global discussion == Although no government has enacted an explicit superintelligence ban, the idea has been debated within the European Union, United Nations, and several independent AI safety organizations. The Future of Life Institute, Center for AI Safety, and other organizations have called for international cooperation to manage risks associated with the pursuit of superintelligent systems. In 2024 and 2025, proposals for a temporary moratorium on frontier AI research were circulated among major technology firms and research institutes, reflecting growing public concern over the trajectory of AI capabilities.

  Read more →
• 

  Friending and following

  Friending is the act of adding someone to a list of "friends" on a social networking service. The notion does not necessarily involve the concept of friendship. It is also distinct from the idea of a "fan"—as employed on the WWW sites of businesses, bands, artists, and others—since it is more than a one-way relationship. A "fan" only receives things. A "friend" can communicate back to the person friending. The act of "friending" someone usually grants that person special privileges (on the service) with respect to oneself. On Facebook, for example, one's "friends" have the privilege of viewing and posting to one's "timeline". Following is a similar concept on other social network services, such as Twitter and Instagram, where a person (follower) chooses to add content from a person or page to their newsfeed. Unlike friending, following is not necessarily mutual, and a person can unfollow (stop following) or block another user at any time without affecting that user's following status. The first scholarly definition and examination of friending and defriending (the act of removing someone from one's friend list, also called unfriending) was David Fono and Kate Raynes-Goldie's "Hyperfriendship and beyond: Friends and Social Norms on LiveJournal" from 2005, which identified the use of the term as both a noun and a verb by users of early social network site and blogging platform LiveJournal, which was originally launched in 1999. == Friend/follower count, friend collecting, and multiple accounts == The addition of people to a friend list without regard to whether one actually is their friend is sometimes known as friend whoring. Matt Jones of Dopplr went so far as to coin the expression "friending considered harmful" to describe the problem of focusing upon the friending of more and more people at the expense of actually making any use of a social network. Friend collecting is the adding of hundreds or thousands of friends/followers, a not uncommon order of magnitude on some social sites. As a result, many teen users feel pressured to heavily curate their posts, posting only carefully posed and edited photographs with well-thought-out captions. Some Instagram users will create a second account, known as a Finsta (short for "Fake Instagram"). A Finsta is typically private, and the owner only allows close friends to follow it. Since the follower count is kept down, the posts can be more candid and silly in nature. Users may also create multiple accounts based on their interests. Someone with a personal social media account might be a photographer and maintain a separate account for that. There is risk associated with following large numbers of people: scholars say that social anxiety could be an effect of managing a large social media network, as users can feel jealous and have a "fear of missing out". == Unfriending and unfollowing == Unfriending is the act of removing someone from a friends list. On Facebook, this means the action is unilateral, meaning, the friendship is terminated on both sides. The act of unfriending is often used when one user was flirting and made the other uncomfortable. Unfollowing is a little different. When a user unfollows someone on Instagram or Twitter, it continues a one-sided relationship. Often, the unfollowed user doesn't realize they were unfollowed, so they continue the following. == Social network friending and friendship == There are distinct groups of "friends" that one can friend on a social networking service. The notion of a social network friend does not necessarily embody the concept of friendship. Although terminology has not yet evolved to distinguish the different types of social networking friends, they can be broken into the following three categories. friends who are actually known These are people that may be one's friends or family in real life, with whom one has regular interaction either on-line or off-line. organizational friends These are companies and other organizations who maintain a "friending" relationship as a contacts list. complete strangers These are social networking "friends" with whom one has no relationship at all. Within these categories "friends" can be made up of strong ties, weak existing ties, weak latent ties, and parasocial ties. Strong ties can be made up of close family members and friends where self-disclosure, intimacy and frequent content occur. Weak existing ties can be made up of acquaintances, co-workers and distance relatives with whom the user has inconsistent contact. Weak latent ties can be made up of people within a similar geographical location or profession that can be used as a potential future bridge to other connections. Parasocial ties can be made up of celebrities, public figures and media personas. Human nature is to reciprocate a friending, marking someone as a friend who has marked oneself as a friend. This is a social norm for social networking services. However, this leads to mixing up who is an actual friend, and who is a contact. Tagging someone as a "contact" who has marked one as a "friend" can be perceived as impolite. Other concerns about this issue are treated in Sherry Turkle's Alone Together which analyses many behavioral dynamics in social media friendships. Turkle defines herself as "cautiously optimistic", but expresses concern that distance communications may undermine genuine face-to-face spoken discourses, lessening people's expectations of one another. One social networking service, FriendFeed, allows one to friend someone as a "fake" friend. The person "fake" friended receives the usual notifications for friending, but that person's updates are not received. Gavin Bell, author of Building Social Web Applications, describes this mechanism as "ludicrous". Results from a 2007 survey the Center for the Digital Future stated that only 23% of internet users have at least one virtual friend whom they have only met online. Ideally the number of virtual friends is directly proportional to the use of the Internet, but the same survey showed 20% of heavy-users (more than 3 hours/day) who claimed an average of 8.7% online friends, reported at least one relationship that started virtually and migrated to in-person contact. This results and other concerning issues are included in the book Networked: The New Social Operating System co-written by Lee Rainie and Barry Wellman in 2012. == Ethical considerations == The act of "friending" someone on a social networking service has particular ethical implications for judges in the United States. Judicial codes of conducts in the various states generally incorporate some form of provision that judges should avoid even the appearance of impropriety. Whether this regulates and even prohibits judges "friending" attorneys that appear before them, and law enforcement personnel, has been the subject of some analysis by the judicial ethics panels of the various states. They haven't all agreed on the guidance that they have given to judges: The New York state Judicial Ethics committee in 2009 simply advised judges to employ caution, noting that the issue of "friending" someone on a social networking service is a publicly observable act that has little difference from other public behavior concerns judges already face. The Florida Judicial Ethics Advisory committee in 2009 noted that, judges being normal human beings, it was unavoidable for judges to form friendships without the responsibilities of their job. It prohibited judges from friending any attorneys that appeared before them, whilst allowing friending of those who do not, on the grounds that it may give the appearance to the general public (even if the substance is otherwise) that those attorneys who are friended hold special sway with the judge. A minority opinion of the committee asserted that there is a substantive difference between "friending" on a social networking service and actual friendship, and that the general public, being aware of the norms of social networking services, was capable of drawing this distinction and would not reasonably conclude either a special degree of influence or a violation of the code of judicial conduct. This minority opinion was outnumbered twice in 2009, both in the Judicial Ethics Advisory and in the Florida Supreme Court Judicial Ethics Advisory committee. The South Carolina judicial conduct committee in 2009 permitted judges to friend attorneys and law enforcement personnel, with the proviso that no judicial business should be conducted upon nor discussed via the social networking service. "... a judge should not become isolated from the community in which the judge lives.", the committee stated. The Kentucky Judicial Ethics committee in 2010 took the same position as the minority opinion in Florida. It urged judges to exercise caution, but recognized that the act of friending "does not, in and of itself, indicate the degree or intensity of a judge's relationship with the person who is the 'friend'

  Read more →
• 

  Hardware-based encryption

  Hardware-based encryption is the use of computer hardware to assist software, or sometimes replace software, in the process of data encryption. Typically, this is implemented as part of the processor's instruction set. For example, the AES encryption algorithm (a modern cipher) can be implemented using the AES instruction set on the ubiquitous x86 architecture. Such instructions also exist on the ARM architecture. However, more unusual systems exist where the cryptography module is separate from the central processor, instead being implemented as a coprocessor, in particular a secure cryptoprocessor or cryptographic accelerator, of which an example is the IBM 4758, or its successor, the IBM 4764. Hardware implementations can be faster and less prone to exploitation than traditional software implementations, and furthermore can be protected against tampering. == History == Prior to the use of computer hardware, cryptography could be performed through various mechanical or electro-mechanical means. An early example is the Scytale used by the Spartans. The Enigma machine was an electro-mechanical system cipher machine notably used by the Germans in World War II. After World War II, purely electronic systems were developed. In 1987 the ABYSS (A Basic Yorktown Security System) project was initiated. The aim of this project was to protect against software piracy. However, the application of computers to cryptography in general dates back to the 1940s and Bletchley Park, where the Colossus computer was used to break the encryption used by German High Command during World War II. The use of computers to encrypt, however, came later. In particular, until the development of the integrated circuit, of which the first was produced in 1960, computers were impractical for encryption, since, in comparison to the portable form factor of the Enigma machine, computers of the era took the space of an entire building. It was only with the development of the microcomputer that computer encryption became feasible, outside of niche applications. The development of the World Wide Web lead to the need for consumers to have access to encryption, as online shopping became prevalent. The key concerns for consumers were security and speed. This led to the eventual inclusion of the key algorithms into processors as a way of both increasing speed and security. == Implementations == === In the instruction set === ==== x86 ==== The X86 architecture, as a CISC (Complex Instruction Set Computer) Architecture, typically implements complex algorithms in hardware. Cryptographic algorithms are no exception. The x86 architecture implements significant components of the AES (Advanced Encryption Standard) algorithm, which can be used by the NSA for Top Secret information. The architecture also includes support for the SHA Hashing Algorithms through the Intel SHA extensions. Whereas AES is a cipher, which is useful for encrypting documents, hashing is used for verification, such as of passwords (see PBKDF2). ==== ARM ==== ARM processors can optionally support Security Extensions. Although ARM is a RISC (Reduced Instruction Set Computer) architecture, there are several optional extensions specified by ARM Holdings. === As a coprocessor === IBM 4758 – The predecessor to the IBM 4764. This includes its own specialised processor, memory and a Random Number Generator. IBM 4764 and IBM 4765, identical except for the connection used. The former uses PCI-X, while the latter uses PCI-e. Both are peripheral devices that plug into the motherboard. === Proliferation === Advanced Micro Devices (AMD) processors are also x86 devices, and have supported the AES instructions since the 2011 Bulldozer processor iteration. Due to the existence of encryption instructions on modern processors provided by both Intel and AMD, the instructions are present on most modern computers. They also exist on many tablets and smartphones due to their implementation in ARM processors. == Advantages == Implementing cryptography in hardware means that part of the processor is dedicated to the task. This can lead to a large increase in speed. In particular, modern processor architectures that support pipelining can often perform other instructions concurrently with the execution of the encryption instruction. Furthermore, hardware can have methods of protecting data from software. Consequently, even if the operating system is compromised, the data may still be secure (see Software Guard Extensions). == Disadvantages == If, however, the hardware implementation is compromised, major issues arise. Malicious software can retrieve the data from the (supposedly) secure hardware – a large class of method used is the timing attack. This is far more problematic to solve than a software bug, even within the operating system. Microsoft regularly deals with security issues through Windows Update. Similarly, regular security updates are released for Mac OS X and Linux, as well as mobile operating systems like iOS, Android, and Windows Phone. However, hardware is a different issue. Sometimes, the issue will be fixable through updates to the processor's microcode (a low level type of software). However, other issues may only be resolvable through replacing the hardware, or a workaround in the operating system which mitigates the performance benefit of the hardware implementation, such as in the Spectre exploit.

  Read more →
• 

  Packingham v. North Carolina

  Packingham v. North Carolina, 582 U.S. 98 (2017), is a case in which the Supreme Court of the United States held that a North Carolina statute that prohibited registered sex offenders from using social media websites was unconstitutional because it violated the First Amendment to the U.S. Constitution, which protects freedom of speech. In 2010, Lester Gerard Packingham, a registered sex offender, posted on Facebook under a pseudonym to comment favorably on a recent traffic court experience. Police then identified Packingham and charged him with violating North Carolina's law. Packingham moved to dismiss the charges, arguing that the state's law violated the First Amendment. The trial court dismissed this motion and ultimately convicted Packingham. A state appellate court initially reversed the trial court, holding that the law did violate the First Amendment, but the North Carolina Supreme Court, the state's highest court, disagreed and reinstated the conviction. In June 2017, the U.S. Supreme Court unanimously reversed the North Carolina Supreme Court's judgment. In the majority opinion authored by Justice Anthony Kennedy, the Court held that social media—defined broadly to include Facebook, Amazon.com, The Washington Post, and WebMD, among many others—is a "protected space" under the First Amendment for lawful speech. The Court offered that North Carolina could protect children through less restrictive means, such as prohibiting "conduct that often presages a sexual crime, like contacting a minor or using a website to gather information about a minor". == Background == === North Carolina statute === In 2008, the state of North Carolina passed a law that made it a felony for a registered sex offender "to access a commercial social networking Web site where the sex offender knows that the site permits minor children to become members or to create or maintain personal Web pages". The law defined a "commercial social networking Web site" using four criteria. Specifically, the website must: be "operated by a person who derives revenue from membership fees, advertising, or other sources related to the operation of the Web site". facilitate "the social introduction between two or more persons for the purposes of friendship, meeting other persons, or information exchanges". allow "users to create Web pages or personal profiles that contain information such as the name or nickname of the user, photographs placed on the personal Web page by the user, other personal information about the user, and links to other personal Web pages on the commercial social networking Web site of friends or associates of the user that may be accessed by other users or visitors to the Web site". provide "users or visitors... mechanisms to communicate with other users, such as a message board, chat room, electronic mail, or instant messenger". The law exempted websites that "Provid[e] only one of the following discrete services: photo-sharing, electronic mail, instant messenger, or chat room or message board platform", as well as websites that have as their primary purpose "the facilitation of commercial transactions involving goods or services between [their] members or visitors". === Facts of the case === In 2002, Lester Gerard Packingham was convicted of taking "indecent liberties with a child", a felony that required him to register as a sex offender. A North Carolina court sentenced him to 10–12 months in prison with 24 months of supervised release. He was given no other special instructions on his behavior outside of prison other than to "remain away from" the minor. In 2010, after a state court dismissed a traffic ticket against Packingham, he submitted a post on Facebook under the name "J. R. Gerrard", stating: "Man God is Good! How about I got so much favor they dismissed the ticket before court even started? No fine, no court cost, no nothing spent. . . . . .Praise be to GOD, WOW! Thanks JESUS!" The Durham Police Department identified Packingham as the author of the post after cross-checking the time of the post with recently dismissed traffic tickets, and a grand jury indicted him for violating the North Carolina statute. === Lower court proceedings === Initially, Packingham moved to dismiss his indictment, arguing that it violated the First Amendment. A North Carolina Superior Court judge denied this motion, and he was convicted of violating the North Carolina social media law. Packingham appealed his conviction to the North Carolina Court of Appeals, which reversed the trial court's decision in 2013. Applying intermediate scrutiny, the court of appeals determined that North Carolina's law violated the First Amendment because it was too broad, applying to all registered sex offenders regardless of whether the offender had committed a crime involving a minor or whether the offender was a continuing threat to minors. The appeals court also stated that the law had been defined broadly enough to prohibit a registered sex offender from conducting a wide array of Internet activity, such as "conducting a 'Google' search, purchasing items on Amazon.com, or accessing a plethora of Web sites unrelated to online communication with minors". In 2015, the North Carolina Supreme Court, the state's highest court, reversed the court of appeals, holding that the law was "constitutional in all respects". The North Carolina Supreme Court found that the statute was a "limitation on conduct" and did not impede any free speech. The state had a vested interest in “forestalling the illicit lurking and contact of minors” by registered sex offenders and potential future victims, and upheld Packingham's conviction. == Supreme Court ruling == Packingham filed a petition for a writ of certiorari with the Supreme Court of the United States. The federal government also filed a brief recommending that the Supreme Court grant certiorari, arguing that the North Carolina Supreme Court incorrectly decided the case in favor of the state. The U.S. Supreme Court granted certiorari in October 2016. Amicus briefs in support of Packingham were filed by the libertarian Cato Institute and the American Civil Liberties Union. The North Carolina Supreme Court filed a brief supporting its prior decision, urging the importance of protecting minors from being stalked online. === Oral argument === The oral argument took place in February 2017. Packingham’s lawyer, David T. Goldberg, argued that the law banned “vast swaths of First Amendment activity”, went too far in restricting which Internet sites could be accessed, and forbade use of the Internet in general. The law targeted speech on some of the platforms that Americans use most often, Goldberg noted, and that under the law Packingham could not even use Twitter to read the myriad messages discussing his own case. He further noted that the law imposes punishment without regard to whether the offender actually did anything wrong. North Carolina’s senior deputy Attorney General, Robert C. Montgomery, argued for the state, and claimed that communication through social media sites is a “crucial channel”. Justice Sonia Sotomayor asked Montgomery to provide evidence as to the claim that by giving Packingham Internet privileges, he would commit another crime. Justice Stephen Breyer added that “It seems to be well-settled law that the state can’t (bar usage) unless there is a 'clear and present danger'." === Opinion of the Court === In June 2017 the Supreme Court delivered a judgment in favor of Packingham, unanimously voting to reverse the state court's ruling. Justice Anthony Kennedy authored the decision, joined by Justice Ginsburg, Justice Breyer, Justice Sotomayor, and Justice Kagan. Kennedy explained the decision: "A fundamental principle of the First Amendment is that all persons have access to places where they can speak and listen, and then, after reflection, speak and listen once more." He continued that "By prohibiting sex offenders from using those websites, North Carolina with one broad stroke bars access to what for many are the principal sources for knowing current events, checking ads for employment, speaking and listening in the modern public square, and otherwise exploring the vast realms of human thought and knowledge." Citing Ashcroft v. Free Speech Coalition as a precedent, Kennedy also wrote: "It is well established that, as a general rule, the Government 'may not suppress lawful speech as the means to suppress unlawful speech'." === Concurring opinion === Justice Samuel Alito wrote an opinion concurring in the judgment, joined by John Roberts and Clarence Thomas. While Alito agreed that the state statute at issue violated the First Amendment, he noted that there are reasonable scenarios for which legal bans for sex offenders can be placed, such as for sites targeted at teenagers. Justice Gorsuch took no part in the decision of the case. == Impact == Packingham v. North Carolina was one of the first U.S. Supreme Court cases to ana

  Read more →
• 

  17LIVE

  17LIVE is an international entertainment platform. As of 2024, 17LIVE is the #3 live broadcasting platform globally, formed by its flagship live stream app 17LIVE (LIVIT in English markets), MEME Live and live stream e-commerce platforms HandsUP and OrderPally. == History == 17LIVE was first founded in Taiwan in 2015 by Jeffery Huang. The company has maintained its leading position since its entry into the Japan market in 2017, becoming the biggest platform for live entertainment in Japan, Taiwan, Hong Kong, and other countries. In 2017, 17 closed out US$33M in series B round to merge with dating software Paktor, with Joseph Phua (Co-founder of Paktor) taking over the leadership of 17LIVE as CEO and Co-founder, as well as to enter the Japan and Hong Kong market. Within one year, 17 Media became the #1 market leader in Japan. In 2018, the company raised $25M in series C round as it got ready for US IPO, which failed to materialize. 17LIVE had an unsuccessful US IPO attempt in 2018. Since then, the company reformed and transformed the business. Some key initiatives include the hiring of current CEO Hirofumi Ono, spin-off of Paktor (dating software business unit), full buy-out of founder Jeffery Huang, acquisition of MEME and HandsUp, and more. Despite the failed IPO attempt, the company continued to push for international expansion, including creating ‘LIVIT’ for the English-speaking markets to enter US, India, and North Africa. In 2019, 17's flagship live streaming app reached 10M downloads in Japan, and the business continues to push for both organic and inorganic expansion. Some key M&A highlights in the year include the acquisition of MEME Live in Southeast Asia, as well as HandsUp, a live e-commerce platform. In 2020, M17 closed out $26.5M in Series D round to continue organic growth in Japan, US and Middle East. In the same year, the company also sold its dating app business, Parktor, to rationalise M17 into a live-stream pure play business, followed by the appointment of its current Chairman, Joseph Phua, and previous Global CEO, Hirofumi Ono. With the buy-out and departure of founder Jeff Huang, the parent holding company M17 Entertainment Limited was officially renamed as 17 LIVE Group. An estimated 60 million users registered in 154 countries and territories in April 2022. In 2022, September, 17LIVE announced Group CEO Hirofumi Ono steps down. Alex Lien takes over the leadership as new Group COO; Jing Shen Ng appointed Group CTO. In 2023, March, 17LIVE announced Alex Lien promoted to Global CEO. Kenta Masuda appointed as Global CFO. === Collaboration with Ayumi Hamasaki === To celebrate its 4th anniversary, 17LIVE collaborated with Japanese singer-songwriter Ayumi Hamasaki, who led the 17LIVE 4th Anniversary meets Ayumi Hamasaki series starting October 18, 2021. Along with composer and arranger Yuta Nakano, Hamasaki judged auditioning artists competing for the chance to work with her and her production team for a debut single. The series was streamed live on the 17LIVE website, the final airing on November 11. The eventual winner was named as Yoshitaka_song. When asked why she collaborated with 17LIVE as a producer, Hamasaki commented: "Although the world has become like this (during COVID-19), I believe that the art of entertainment can give people dreams, hope, courage, and strength. I hope that kind of light will continue to shine through the entertainment industry." == Features == On 17LIVE, artists (LIVERs) are able to broadcast live, and post photos and videos from their album. The app has been designed for LIVERs to simply open the App, and start sharing contents without the need to edit or professionally curate their videos. The platform cultivates LIVERs, supports them with a local content management team, and provides artists with various functions, such as real time chatting, gifting, fan clubs, interactive competition and events. Today, 17LIVE has 46 thousands contracted artists and more than 2.3 million MAU, who spend 44 minutes on the platform every day. 17LIVE continues to advocate content-driven philosophy and delivers diverse topics, from politics and music to entertainment, to broaden its audience groups. 17LIVE also hosts offline flash events and concerts to attract new users and support LIVERs better connect with their fans. == Operation == 17LIVE has over 700 employees globally. The app provides few monetization models for LIVERs on the platform, including: Gifting: user / fans buy virtual gifts on the app to send to their favored LIVERs. Subscription: monthly subscription fan club service for access to exclusive content Pay-per-view: ticket service for online streaming concerts E-commerce: live e-commerce platform In the past, 17LIVE has encountered some regulatory headwinds with reported incidents of inappropriate livestream content on the platform. The incidents were direct results of the lack of oversight and supervision capability in place in the business at the time. Over the years, 17LIVE claims to have put in tremendous manpower and effort into improving, monitoring and maintaining control over both the live stream content and the KYC procedures and systems.

  Read more →
• 

  Pull technology

  Pull coding or client pull is a style of network communication, where the initial request for data originates from the client, and then is responded to by the server. The reverse is known as push technology, where the server pushes data to clients. Pull requests form the foundation of network computing, where many clients request data from centralized servers. Pull is used extensively on the Internet for HTTP page requests from websites. A push can also be simulated using multiple pulls within a short amount of time. For example, when pulling POP3 email messages from a server, a client can make regular pull requests, every few minutes. To the user, the email then appears to be pushed, as emails appear to arrive close to real-time. A trade-off of this system is that it places a heavier load on both the server and network to function correctly. Many web feeds, such as RSS are technically pulled by the client. With RSS, the user's RSS reader polls the server periodically for new content; the server does not send information to the client unrequested. This continual polling is inefficient and has contributed to the shutdown or reduction of several popular RSS feeds that could not handle the bandwidth. For solving this problem, the WebSub protocol, as another example of a push code, was devised. Podcasting is specifically a pull technology. When a new podcast episode is published to an RSS feed, it sits on the server until it is requested by a feed reader, mobile podcasting app, or directory. Directories such as Apple Podcasts (iTunes), The Blubrry Directory, and many apps' directories request the RSS feed periodically to update the Podcast's listing on those platforms. Subscribers to those RSS feeds via app or reader will get the episodes when they request the RSS feed next time, independent of when the directory listing updates.

  Read more →
• 

  Facebook

  Facebook is an American social networking service owned by the American technology conglomerate Meta Platforms. It was founded in 2004 by Mark Zuckerberg, along with his Harvard College roommates and fellow students Eduardo Saverin, Andrew McCollum, Dustin Moskovitz, and Chris Hughes. The name Facebook derives from the face book directories often given to American university students. The service was initially limited to Harvard students before gradually expanding to other universities in North America. Since 2006, Facebook has permitted registration by individuals aged 13 and older, with the exception of South Korea, Spain, and Quebec, where the minimum age is 14. As of December 2023, Facebook reported approximately 3.07 billion monthly active users worldwide. As of July 2025, it was ranked as the third-most-visited website in the world, with 23 percent of its traffic originating from the United States. It was the most downloaded mobile application of the 2010s. Facebook can be accessed from devices with Internet connectivity, such as personal computers, tablets and smartphones. After registering, users can create a profile revealing personal information about themselves. They can post text, photos and multimedia which are shared either publicly or exclusively with other users who have agreed to be their friend, depending on privacy settings. Users can also communicate directly with each other with Messenger, edit messages (within 15 minutes after sending), join common-interest groups, and receive notifications on the activities of their Facebook friends and the pages they follow. Facebook has often been criticized over issues such as user privacy (as with the Facebook–Cambridge Analytica data scandal), political manipulation (as with the 2016 U.S. elections) and mass surveillance. The company has also been subject to criticism over its psychological effects such as addiction and low self-esteem, and over content such as fake news, conspiracy theories, copyright infringement, and hate speech. Commentators have accused Facebook of willingly facilitating the spread of such content, as well as overemphasizing its number of users to appeal to advertisers. == History == The history of Facebook traces its growth from a college networking site to a global social networking service. While attending Phillips Exeter in the early 2000s, Zuckerberg met Kris Tillery. Tillery, a one-time project collaborator with Zuckerberg, would create a school-based social networking project called Photo Address Book. Photo Address Book was a digital face book, created through a linked database composed of student information derived from the official records of the Exeter Student Council. The database contained linkages such as name, dorm-specific landline numbers, and student headshots. Mark Zuckerberg built a website called "Facemash" in 2003 while attending Harvard University. The site was comparable to Hot or Not and used photos from online face books, asking users to choose the 'hotter' person". Zuckerberg was reported and faced expulsion, but the charges were dropped. A "face book" is a student directory featuring photos and personal information. In January 2004, Zuckerberg coded a new site known as "TheFacebook", stating, "It is clear that the technology needed to create a centralized Website is readily available ... the benefits are many." Zuckerberg met with Harvard student Eduardo Saverin, and each agreed to invest $1,000. On February 4, 2004, Zuckerberg launched "TheFacebook". Membership was initially restricted to students of Harvard College. Dustin Moskovitz, Andrew McCollum, and Chris Hughes joined Zuckerberg to help manage the growth of the site. It became available successively to most universities in the US and Canada. In 2004, Napster co-founder Sean Parker became company president and the company moved to Palo Alto, California. PayPal co-founder Peter Thiel gave Facebook its first investment. In 2005, the company dropped "the" from its name after purchasing the domain name Facebook.com. In 2006, Facebook opened to everyone at least or only 13 years old with a valid email address. Facebook introduced key features like the News Feed, which became central to user engagement. By late 2007, Facebook had 100,000 pages on which companies promoted themselves. Facebook had surpassed MySpace in global traffic and became the world's most popular social media platform. Microsoft announced that it had purchased a 1.6% share of Facebook for $240 million ($373 million in 2025 dollars), giving Facebook an implied value of around $15 billion ($23.3 billion in 2025 dollars). Facebook focused on generating revenue through targeted advertising based on user data, a model that drove its rapid financial growth. In 2012, Facebook went public with one of the largest IPOs in tech history. Acquisitions played a significant role in Facebook's dominance. In 2012, it purchased Instagram, followed by WhatsApp and Oculus VR in 2014, extending its influence beyond social networking into messaging and virtual reality. The Facebook–Cambridge Analytica data scandal in 2018 revealed misuse of user data to influence elections, sparking global outcry and leading to regulatory fines and hearings. Facebook's role in global events, including its use in organizing movements like the Arab Spring and its impact on events like the Rohingya genocide in Myanmar, highlighted its dual nature as a tool for both empowerment and harm. In 2021, Facebook rebranded as Meta, reflecting its shift toward building the "metaverse" and focusing on virtual reality and augmented reality technologies. == Features == Facebook does not officially publish a maximum character limit for posts; however, user posts can be lengthy, with unofficial sources suggesting a high character limit. Posts may also include images and videos. According to Facebook's official business documentation, videos can be up to 240 minutes long and 10 GB in file size, with supported resolutions up to 1080p. Users can "friend" users, both sides must agree to being friends. Posts can be changed to be seen by everyone (public), friends, people in a certain group (group) or by selected friends (private). Users can join groups. Groups are composed of persons with shared interests. For example, they might go to the same sporting club, live in the same suburb, have the same breed of pet or share a hobby. Posts posted in a group can be seen only by those in a group, unless set to public. Users are able to buy, sell, and swap things on Facebook Marketplace or in a Buy, Swap and Sell group. Facebook users may advertise events, which can be offline, on a website other than Facebook, or on Facebook. == Website == === Technical aspects === The site's primary color is blue as Zuckerberg is red–green colorblind, a realization that occurred after a test taken around 2007. Facebook was initially built using PHP, a popular scripting language designed for web development. PHP was used to create dynamic content and manage data on the server side of the Facebook application. Zuckerberg and co-founders chose PHP for its simplicity and ease of use, which allowed them to quickly develop and deploy the initial version of Facebook. As Facebook grew in user base and functionality, the company encountered scalability and performance challenges with PHP. In response, Facebook engineers developed tools and technologies to optimize PHP performance. One of the most significant was the creation of the HipHop Virtual Machine (HHVM). This significantly improved the performance and efficiency of PHP code execution on Facebook's servers. The site upgraded from HTTP to the more secure HTTPS in January 2011. ==== 2012 architecture ==== Facebook is developed as one monolithic application. According to an interview in 2012 with Facebook build engineer Chuck Rossi, Facebook compiles into a 1.5 GB binary blob which is then distributed to the servers using a custom BitTorrent-based release system. Rossi stated that it takes about 15 minutes to build and 15 minutes to release to the servers. The build and release process has zero downtime. Changes to Facebook are rolled out daily. Facebook used a combination platform based on HBase to store data across distributed machines. Using a tailing architecture, events are stored in log files, and the logs are tailed. The system rolls these events up and writes them to storage. The user interface then pulls the data out and displays it to users. Facebook handles requests as AJAX behavior. These requests are written to a log file using Scribe (developed by Facebook). Data is read from these log files using Ptail, an internally built tool to aggregate data from multiple Scribe stores. It tails the log files and pulls data out. Ptail data are separated into three streams and sent to clusters in different data centers (Plugin impression, News feed impressions, Actions (plugin + news feed)). Puma is used to manage periods of high data

  Read more →
• 

  IP Multimedia Subsystem

  The IP Multimedia Subsystem or IP Multimedia Core Network Subsystem (IMS) is a standardized architectural framework for delivering IP-based multimedia services. Historically, mobile phones have provided voice call services over a circuit-switched network, rather than over an IP-based packet-switched network. Various VoIP technologies are available on smartphones; IMS offers a standardized protocol across different vendors. IMS was originally designed by the wireless standards body 3rd Generation Partnership Project (3GPP), as a part of the vision for evolving mobile networks beyond GSM. Its original formulation (3GPP Rel-5) represented an approach for delivering Internet services over GPRS. This vision was later updated by 3GPP, 3GPP2 and ETSI TISPAN by requiring support of networks other than GPRS, such as Wireless LAN, CDMA2000 and fixed lines. IMS uses IETF protocols wherever possible, e.g., the Session Initiation Protocol (SIP). According to the 3GPP, IMS is not intended to standardize applications, but rather to aid the access of multimedia and voice applications from wireless and wireline terminals, i.e., to create a form of fixed-mobile convergence (FMC). This is done by having a horizontal control layer that isolates the access network from the service layer. From a logical architecture perspective, services need not have their own control functions, as the control layer is a common horizontal layer. However, in implementation this does not necessarily map into greater reduced cost and complexity. Alternative and overlapping technologies for access and provisioning of services across wired and wireless networks include combinations of Generic Access Network, softswitches and "naked" SIP. Since it is becoming increasingly easier to access content and contacts using mechanisms outside the control of traditional wireless/fixed operators, the interest of IMS is being challenged. Examples of global standards based on IMS are MMTel which is the basis for Voice over LTE (VoLTE), Wi-Fi Calling (VoWIFI), Video over LTE (ViLTE), SMS/MMS over WiFi and LTE, Unstructured Supplementary Service Data (USSD) over LTE, and Rich Communication Services (RCS), which is also known as joyn or Advanced Messaging, and now RCS is operator's implementation. RCS also further added Presence/EAB (enhanced address book) functionality. == History == IMS was defined by an industry forum called 3G.IP, formed in 1999. 3G.IP developed the initial IMS architecture, which was brought to the 3rd Generation Partnership Project (3GPP), as part of their standardization work for 3G mobile phone systems in UMTS networks. It first appeared in Release 5 (evolution from 2G to 3G networks), when SIP-based multimedia was added. Support for the older GSM and GPRS networks was also provided. 3GPP2 (a different organization from 3GPP) based their CDMA2000 Multimedia Domain (MMD) on 3GPP IMS, adding support for CDMA2000. 3GPP release 6 added interworking with WLAN, inter-operability between IMS using different IP-connectivity networks, routing group identities, multiple registration and forking, presence, speech recognition and speech-enabled services (Push to talk). 3GPP release 7 added support for fixed networks by working together with TISPAN release R1.1, the function of AGCF (access gateway control function) and PES (PSTN emulation service) are introduced to the wire-line network for the sake of inheritance of services which can be provided in PSTN network. AGCF works as a bridge interconnecting the IMS networks and the Megaco/H.248 networks. Megaco/H.248 networks offers the possibility to connect terminals of the old legacy networks to the new generation of networks based on IP networks. AGCF acts a SIP User agent towards the IMS and performs the role of P-CSCF. SIP User Agent functionality is included in the AGCF, and not on the customer device but in the network itself. Also added voice call continuity between circuit switching and packet switching domain (VCC), fixed broadband connection to the IMS, interworking with non-IMS networks, policy and charging control (PCC), emergency sessions. It also added SMS over IP. 3GPP release 8 added support for LTE / SAE, multimedia session continuity, enhanced emergency sessions, SMS over SGs and IMS centralized services. 3GPP release 9 added support for IMS emergency calls over GPRS and EPS, enhancements to multimedia telephony, IMS media plane security, enhancements to services centralization and continuity. 3GPP release 10 added support for inter device transfer, enhancements to the single radio voice call continuity (SRVCC), enhancements to IMS emergency sessions. 3GPP release 11 added USSD simulation service, network-provided location information for IMS, SMS submit and delivery without MSISDN in IMS, and overload control. Some operators opposed IMS because it was seen as complex and expensive. In response, a cut-down version of IMS—enough of IMS to support voice and SMS over the LTE network—was defined and standardized in 2010 as Voice over LTE (VoLTE). == Architecture == Each of the functions in the diagram is explained below. The IP multimedia core network subsystem is a collection of different functions, linked by standardized interfaces, which grouped form one IMS administrative network. A function is not a node (hardware box): An implementer is free to combine two functions in one node, or to split a single function into two or more nodes. Each node can also be present multiple times in a single network, for dimensioning, load balancing or organizational issues. === Access network === The user can connect to IMS in various ways, most of which use the standard IP. IMS terminals (such as mobile phones, personal digital assistants (PDAs) and computers) can register directly on IMS, even when they are roaming in another network or country (the visited network). The only requirement is that they can use IP and run SIP user agents. Fixed access (e.g., digital subscriber line (DSL), cable modems, Ethernet, FTTx), mobile access (e.g. 5G NR, LTE, W-CDMA, CDMA2000, GSM, GPRS) and wireless access (e.g., WLAN, WiMAX) are all supported. Other phone systems like plain old telephone service (POTS—the old analogue telephones), H.323 and non IMS-compatible systems, are supported through gateways. === Core network === HSS – Home subscriber server: The home subscriber server (HSS), or user profile server function (UPSF), is a master user database that supports the IMS network entities that actually handle calls. It contains the subscription-related information (subscriber profiles), performs authentication and authorization of the user, and can provide information about the subscriber's location and IP information. It is similar to the GSM home location register (HLR) and Authentication centre (AuC). A subscriber location function (SLF) is needed to map user addresses when multiple HSSs are used. User identities: Various identities may be associated with IMS: IP multimedia private identity (IMPI), IP multimedia public identity (IMPU), globally routable user agent URI (GRUU), wildcarded public user identity. Both IMPI and IMPU are not phone numbers or other series of digits, but uniform resource identifier (URIs), that can be digits (a Tel URI, such as tel:+1-555-123-4567) or alphanumeric identifiers (a SIP URI, such as sip:[email protected] ). IP Multimedia Private Identity: The IP Multimedia Private Identity (IMPI) is a unique permanently allocated global identity assigned by the home network operator. It has the form of a Network Access Identifier(NAI) i.e. user.name@domain, and is used, for example, for Registration, Authorization, Administration, and Accounting purposes. Every IMS user shall have one IMPI. IP Multimedia Public Identity: The IP Multimedia Public Identity (IMPU) is used by any user for requesting communications to other users (e.g. this might be included on a business card). Also known as Address of Record (AOR). There can be multiple IMPU per IMPI. The IMPU can also be shared with another phone, so that both can be reached with the same identity (for example, a single phone-number for an entire family). Globally Routable User Agent URI: Globally Routable User Agent URI (GRUU) is an identity that identifies a unique combination of IMPU and UE instance. There are two types of GRUU: Public-GRUU (P-GRUU) and Temporary GRUU (T-GRUU). P-GRUU reveal the IMPU and are very long lived. T-GRUU do not reveal the IMPU and are valid until the contact is explicitly de-registered or the current registration expires Wildcarded Public User Identity: A wildcarded Public User Identity expresses a set of IMPU grouped together. The HSS subscriber database contains the IMPU, IMPI, IMSI, MSISDN, subscriber service profiles, service triggers, and other information. ==== Call Session Control Function (CSCF) ==== Several roles of SIP servers or proxies, collectively called Call Session Control Function (CSCF), are used to process SIP sign

  Read more →
• 

  Richardson–Lucy deconvolution

  The Richardson–Lucy algorithm, also known as Lucy–Richardson deconvolution, is an iterative procedure for recovering an underlying image that has been blurred by a known point spread function. It was named after William Richardson and Leon B. Lucy, who described it independently. == Description == When an image is produced using an optical system and detected using photographic film, a charge-coupled device or a CMOS sensor, for example, it is inevitably blurred, with an ideal point source not appearing as a point but being spread out into what is known as the point spread function. Extended sources can be decomposed into the sum of many individual point sources, thus the observed image can be represented in terms of a transition matrix p operating on an underlying image: d i = ∑ j p i , j u j , {\displaystyle d_{i}=\sum _{j}p_{i,j}u_{j},} where u j {\displaystyle u_{j}} is the intensity of the underlying image at pixel j {\displaystyle j} , and d i {\displaystyle d_{i}} is the detected intensity at pixel i {\displaystyle i} . In general, a matrix whose elements are p i , j {\displaystyle p_{i,j}} describes the portion of light from source pixel j that is detected in pixel i. In most good optical systems (or in general, linear systems that are described as shift-invariant) the transfer function p can be expressed simply in terms of the spatial offset between the source pixel j and the observation pixel i: p i , j = P ( i − j ) , {\displaystyle p_{i,j}=P(i-j),} where P ( Δ i ) {\displaystyle P(\Delta i)} is called a point spread function. In that case the above equation becomes a convolution. This has been written for one spatial dimension, but most imaging systems are two-dimensional, with the source, detected image, and point spread function all having two indices. So a two-dimensional detected image is a convolution of the underlying image with a two-dimensional point spread function P ( Δ x , Δ y ) {\displaystyle P(\Delta x,\Delta y)} plus added detection noise. In order to estimate u j {\displaystyle u_{j}} given the observed d i {\displaystyle d_{i}} and a known P ( Δ i x , Δ j y ) {\displaystyle P(\Delta i_{x},\Delta j_{y})} , the following iterative procedure is employed in which the estimate of u j {\displaystyle u_{j}} (called u ^ j ( t ) {\displaystyle {\hat {u}}_{j}^{(t)}} ) for iteration number t is updated as follows: u ^ j ( t + 1 ) = u ^ j ( t ) ∑ i d i c i p i j , {\displaystyle {\hat {u}}_{j}^{(t+1)}={\hat {u}}_{j}^{(t)}\sum _{i}{\frac {d_{i}}{c_{i}}}p_{ij},} where c i = ∑ j p i j u ^ j ( t ) , {\displaystyle c_{i}=\sum _{j}p_{ij}{\hat {u}}_{j}^{(t)},} and ∑ j p i j = 1 {\displaystyle \sum _{j}p_{ij}=1} is assumed. It has been shown empirically that if this iteration converges, it converges to the maximum likelihood solution for u j {\displaystyle u_{j}} . Writing this more generally for two (or more) dimensions in terms of convolution with a point spread function P: u ^ ( t + 1 ) = u ^ ( t ) ⋅ ( d u ^ ( t ) ⊗ P ⊗ P ∗ ) , {\displaystyle {\hat {u}}^{(t+1)}={\hat {u}}^{(t)}\cdot \left({\frac {d}{{\hat {u}}^{(t)}\otimes P}}\otimes P^{}\right),} where the division and multiplication are element-wise, ⊗ {\displaystyle \otimes } indicates a 2D convolution, and P ∗ {\displaystyle P^{}} is the mirrored point spread function, or the inverse Fourier transform of the Hermitian transpose of the optical transfer function. In problems where the point spread function p i j {\displaystyle p_{ij}} is not known a priori, a modification of the Richardson–Lucy algorithm has been proposed, in order to accomplish blind deconvolution. == Derivation == In the context of fluorescence microscopy, the probability of measuring a set of number of photons (or digitalization counts proportional to detected light) m = [ m 0 , … , m K ] {\displaystyle \mathbf {m} =[m_{0},\dots ,m_{K}]} for expected values E = [ E 0 , … , E K ] {\displaystyle \mathbf {E} =[E_{0},\dots ,E_{K}]} for a detector with K + 1 {\displaystyle K+1} pixels is given by P ( m ∣ E ) = ∏ i K Poisson ⁡ ( E i ) = ∏ i K E i m i e − E i m i ! . {\displaystyle P(\mathbf {m} \mid \mathbf {E} )=\prod _{i}^{K}\operatorname {Poisson} (E_{i})=\prod _{i}^{K}{\frac {E_{i}^{m_{i}}e^{-E_{i}}}{m_{i}!}}.} Since in the context of maximum-likelihood estimation the aim is to locate the maximum of the likelihood function without concern for its absolute value, it is convenient to work with ln ⁡ ( P ) {\displaystyle \ln(P)} : ln ⁡ P ( m ∣ E ) = ∑ i K [ ( m i ln ⁡ E i − E i ) − ln ⁡ ( m i ! ) ] . {\displaystyle \ln P(\mathbf {m} \mid \mathbf {E} )=\sum _{i}^{K}[(m_{i}\ln E_{i}-E_{i})-\ln(m_{i}!)].} Moreover, since ln ⁡ ( m i ! ) {\displaystyle \ln(m_{i}!)} is a constant, it does not give any additional information regarding the position of the maximum, so consider α ( m ∣ E ) = ∑ i K [ m i ln ⁡ E i − E i ] , {\displaystyle \alpha (\mathbf {m} \mid \mathbf {E} )=\sum _{i}^{K}[m_{i}\ln E_{i}-E_{i}],} where α {\displaystyle \alpha } is something that shares the same maximum position as P ( m ∣ E ) {\displaystyle P(\mathbf {m} \mid \mathbf {E} )} . Now consider that E {\displaystyle \mathbf {E} } comes from a ground truth x {\displaystyle \mathbf {x} } and a measurement H {\displaystyle \mathbf {H} } which is assumed to be linear. Then E = H x , {\displaystyle \mathbf {E} =\mathbf {H} \mathbf {x} ,} where a matrix multiplication is implied. This can also be written in the form E m = ∑ n K H m n x n , {\displaystyle E_{m}=\sum _{n}^{K}H_{mn}x_{n},} where it can be seen how H {\displaystyle H} mixes or blurs the ground truth. It can also be shown that the derivative of an element of E {\displaystyle \mathbf {E} } , ( E i ) {\displaystyle (E_{i})} with respect to some other element of x j {\displaystyle x_{j}} can be written as It is easy to see this by writing a matrix H {\displaystyle \mathbf {H} } of, say, 5 × 5 and two arrays E {\displaystyle \mathbf {E} } and x {\displaystyle \mathbf {x} } of 5 elements and check it. This last equation can be interpreted as how much one element of x {\displaystyle \mathbf {x} } , say element i {\displaystyle i} , influences the other elements j ≠ i {\displaystyle j\neq i} (and of course the case i = j {\displaystyle i=j} is also taken into account). For example, in a typical case an element of the ground truth x {\displaystyle \mathbf {x} } will influence nearby elements in E {\displaystyle \mathbf {E} } but not the very distant ones (a value of 0 {\displaystyle 0} is expected on those matrix elements). Now, the key and arbitrary step: x {\displaystyle \mathbf {x} } is not known but may be estimated by x ^ {\displaystyle {\hat {\mathbf {x} }}} . Let's call x ^ old {\displaystyle {\hat {\mathbf {x} }}_{\text{old}}} and x ^ new {\displaystyle {\hat {\mathbf {x} }}_{\text{new}}} the estimated ground truths while using the RL algorithm, where the hat symbol is used to distinguish ground truth from estimator of the ground truth where ∂ ∂ x {\displaystyle {\frac {\partial }{\partial \mathbf {x} }}} stands for a K {\displaystyle K} -dimensional gradient. Performing the partial derivative of α ( m ∣ E ( x ) ) {\displaystyle \alpha (\mathbf {m} \mid \mathbf {E} (\mathbf {x} ))} yields the following expression: ∂ α ( m ∣ E ( x ) ) ∂ x j = ∂ ∂ x j ∑ i K [ m i ln ⁡ E i − E i ] = ∑ i K [ m i E i ∂ ∂ x j E i − ∂ ∂ x j E i ] = ∑ i K ∂ E i ∂ x j [ m i E i − 1 ] . {\displaystyle {\frac {\partial \alpha (\mathbf {m} \mid \mathbf {E} (\mathbf {x} ))}{\partial x_{j}}}={\frac {\partial }{\partial x_{j}}}\sum _{i}^{K}[m_{i}\ln E_{i}-E_{i}]=\sum _{i}^{K}\left[{\frac {m_{i}}{E_{i}}}{\frac {\partial }{\partial x_{j}}}E_{i}-{\frac {\partial }{\partial x_{j}}}E_{i}\right]=\sum _{i}^{K}{\frac {\partial E_{i}}{\partial x_{j}}}\left[{\frac {m_{i}}{E_{i}}}-1\right].} By substituting (1), it follows that ∂ α ( m ∣ E ( x ) ) ∂ x j = ∑ i K H i j [ m i E i − 1 ] . {\displaystyle {\frac {\partial \alpha (\mathbf {m} \mid \mathbf {E} (\mathbf {x} ))}{\partial x_{j}}}=\sum _{i}^{K}H_{ij}\left[{\frac {m_{i}}{E_{i}}}-1\right].} Note that H j i T = H i j {\displaystyle H_{ji}^{T}=H_{ij}} by the definition of a matrix transpose. And hence Since this equation is true for all j {\displaystyle j} spanning all the elements from 1 {\displaystyle 1} to K {\displaystyle K} , these K {\displaystyle K} equations may be compactly rewritten as a single vectorial equation ∂ α ( m ∣ E ( x ) ) ∂ x = H T [ m E − 1 ] , {\displaystyle {\frac {\partial \alpha (\mathbf {m} \mid \mathbf {E} (\mathbf {x} ))}{\partial \mathbf {x} }}=\mathbf {H} ^{T}\left[{\frac {\mathbf {m} }{\mathbf {E} }}-\mathbf {1} \right],} where H T {\displaystyle \mathbf {H} ^{T}} is a matrix, and m {\displaystyle \mathbf {m} } , E {\displaystyle \mathbf {E} } and 1 {\displaystyle \mathbf {1} } are vectors. Now, as a seemingly arbitrary but key step, let where 1 {\displaystyle \mathbf {1} } is a vector of ones of size K {\displaystyle K} (same as m {\displaystyle \mathbf {m} } , E {\displaystyle \mathbf {E} } and x {\displaystyle \mathbf {x} } ), and the d

  Read more →
• 

  International World Wide Web Conference Committee

  The International World Wide Web Conference Committee (abbreviated as IW3C2 also written as IW3C2) is a professional non-profit organization registered in Switzerland (Article 60ff of the Swiss Civil Code) that promotes World Wide Web research and development. The IW3C2 organizes and hosts the annual World Wide Web Conference in conjunction with the W3C. The IW3C2 was founded by Joseph Hardin and Robert Cailliau at a meeting held in Boston, United States, on 14 August 1994 to prepare for the upcoming Second International World Wide Web Conference in Chicago. The IW3C2 formally became an incorporated entity in May 1996 at the fifth conference in Paris, France. The organization is governed by laws of the Swiss Confederation and the By-laws. == Abbreviation == The abbreviation for the International World Wide Web Conference Committee as IW3C2 is as follow: I- The I is represents the leading I in International. W3- The W3 represents the three 3 leading W's in World Wide Web. C2- The C2 represents the three 2 leading C's in Conference Committee. == Mission == The mission of the IW3C2 is: To coordinate the organization and planning of the international WWW conference series and ensure that it remains the foremost conference addressing World Wide Web research and development; To promote a collaborative spirit among conference attendees that is essential to the success of the series; To ensure the global geographical diversity of conference sites and provide support to local organizers at those sites; To make sure that all content arising from these conferences and forums is permanently and openly available on the widest possible scale; To preserve the history of the conference series; To encourage the global development of the World Wide Web through collaboration with WWW standards organizations; To provide a permanent, broad-based international body to achieve these purposes. == Conferences == The conferences are organized by the IW3C2 in collaboration with local organizing committees and technical program committees. The series provides an open forum in which all opinions can be presented, subject to a strict process of peer review. The proceedings of the conference are published in the ACM Digital Library. === Endorsed conferences === The IW3C2 has endorsed regional conferences devoted to a special topic of the Web by working with endorsed conferences on cross-promotion, publicity and programs. == Membership == Members of the IW3C2 are ordinary members, ex officio members, non-voting members, and officers. === Ordinary members === Ordinary members are elected for a period of 3 years during a general meeting. Members are nominated due to their recognition in the WWW community and represent themselves. Members can be re-elected only after at least one year of absence. The following are the founding members at the time when IW3C2 was officially incorporated in May 1996: Jean-François Abramatic Tim Berners-Lee Robert Cailliau Dale Dougherty Ira Goldstein Joseph Hardin Tim Krauskopf Detlef Krömker Corinne Moore R. P. Channing Rodgers Albert Vezza Stuart Weibel Yuri Rubinsky (died prior to incorporation) The following are the current (April 2016) ordinary members: Robin Chen Chin-Wan Chung Allan Ellis Wendy Hall - IW3C2 Chair Ivan Herman Arun Iyengar - IW3C2 Vice Chair Irwin King Yoelle Maarek Luc Mariaux - IW3C2 Treasurer Daniel Schwabe - IW3C2 Vice-Chair === Ex officio members === Ex officio members are selected from the immediate past conference general co-chairs and from future conference co-chairs. Their term expires one year after the conference they organized. Ex officio members can be elected as ordinary members. The following are current (April 2016) ex officio members and the conference with which they are affiliated: Jacqueline Bourdeau - WWW2016 James Hendler - WWW2016 Rick Barrett - WWW2017 Rick Cummings - WWW2017 Laurent Flory - WWW2018 Fabien Gandon - WWW2018 === Officers === The IW3C2 officers consist of a chairperson, a vice-chair (chairperson-elect), a secretary, a treasurer, and other appointees. Officers are elected during a general meeting (usually at the annual WWW conference) and serve for one year. They can be re-elected an indefinite number of times. == The Seoul Test of Time Award == This annual award, presented at the WWW conference, is made possible by a generous contribution from the organizers of WWW2014 (Seoul Korea). Recipients are determined by the IW3C2 and honor the author, or authors, of a paper presented at a previous WWW conference that has "stood the test of time." The first award, announced at WWW2015 (Florence Italy), recognized Sergey Brin and Larry Page, the founders of Google. The recipients of the WWW2016 award are LinkIn scientist Dr. Badrul Sarwar and University of Minnesota professors George Karypis, Joseph Konstan, and John Riedl (posthumous) for their work in item-item collaborative filtering.

  Read more →
• 

  ISO/IEC 11801

  International standard ISO/IEC 11801 Information technology — Generic cabling for customer premises specifies general-purpose telecommunication cabling systems (structured cabling) that are suitable for a wide range of applications (analog and ISDN telephony, various data communication standards, building control systems, factory automation). It is published by ISO/IEC JTC 1/SC 25/WG 3 of the International Organization for Standardization (ISO) and the International Electrotechnical Commission (IEC). It covers both balanced copper cabling and optical fibre cabling. The standard was designed for use within commercial premises that may consist of either a single building or of multiple buildings on a campus. It was optimized for premises that span up to 3 km, up to 1 km2 office space, with between 50 and 50,000 persons, but can also be applied for installations outside this range. A major revision was released in November 2017, unifying requirements for commercial, home and industrial networks. == Classes and categories == The standard defines several link/channel classes and cabling categories of twisted-pair copper interconnects, which differ in the maximum frequency for which a certain channel performance is required: Class A: Up to 100 kHz using Category 1 cable and connectors Class B: Up to 1 MHz using Category 2 cable and connectors Class C: Up to 16 MHz using Category 3 cable and connectors Class D: Up to 100 MHz using Category 5e cable and connectors Class E: Up to 250 MHz using Category 6 cable and connectors Class EA: Up to 500 MHz using category 6A cable and connectors (Amendments 1 and 2 to ISO/IEC 11801, 2nd Ed.) Class F: Up to 600 MHz using Category 7 cable and connectors Class FA: Up to 1 GHz (1000 MHz) using Category 7A cable and connectors (Amendments 1 and 2 to ISO/IEC 11801, 2nd Ed.) Class BCT-B: Up to 1 GHz (1000 MHz) using with coaxial cabling for BCT applications. (ISO/IEC 11801-1, Edition 1.0 2017-11) Class I: Up to 2 GHz (2000 MHz) using Category 8.1 cable and connectors (ISO/IEC 11801-1, Edition 1.0 2017-11) Class II: Up to 2 GHz (2000 MHz) using Category 8.2 cable and connectors (ISO/IEC 11801-1, Edition 1.0 2017-11) The standard link impedance is 100 Ω. (The older 1995 version of the standard also permitted 120 Ω and 150 Ω in Classes A−C, but this was removed from the 2002 edition.) The standard defines several classes of optical fiber interconnect: OM1: Multimode, 62.5 μm core; minimum modal bandwidth of 200 MHz·km at 850 nm OM2: Multimode, 50 μm core; minimum modal bandwidth of 500 MHz·km at 850 nm OM3: Multimode, 50 μm core; minimum modal bandwidth of 2000 MHz·km at 850 nm OM4: Multimode, 50 μm core; minimum modal bandwidth of 4700 MHz·km at 850 nm OM5: Multimode, 50 μm core; minimum modal bandwidth of 4700 MHz·km at 850 nm and 2470 MHz·km at 953 nm OS1: Single-mode, maximum attenuation 1 dB/km at 1310 and 1550 nm OS1a: Single-mode, maximum attenuation 1 dB/km at 1310, 1383, and 1550 nm OS2: Single-mode, maximum attenuation 0.4 dB/km at 1310, 1383, and 1550 nm Grandfathered === OM5 === OM5 fiber is designed for wideband applications using SWDM multiplexing of 4–16 carriers (40G=4λ×10G, 100G=4λ×25G, 400G=4×4λ×25G) in the 850–953 nm range. === Category 7 === Class F channel and Category 7 cable are backward compatible with Class D/Category 5e and Class E/Category 6. Class F features even stricter specifications for crosstalk and system noise than Class E. To achieve this, shielding was added for individual wire pairs and the cable as a whole. Unshielded cables rely on the quality of the twists to protect from EMI. This involves a tight twist and carefully controlled design. Cables with individual shielding per pair such as Category 7 rely mostly on the shield and therefore have pairs with longer twists. The Category 7 cable standard was ratified in 2002, and primarily introduced to support 10 gigabit Ethernet over 100 m of copper cabling. Like the earlier standards, it contains four twisted copper wire pairs rated for transmission frequencies of up to 600 MHz. However, in 2006, Category 6A was ratified for Ethernet to allow 10 Gbit/s while still using the conventional 8P8C connector. Care is required to avoid signal degradation by mixing cable and connectors not designed for that use, however similar. Most manufacturers of active equipment and network cards have chosen to support the 8P8C for their 10 gigabit Ethernet products on copper and not GG45, ARJ45, or TERA connectors as Class F would have originally called for. Therefore, the Category 6 specification was revised to Category 6A to permit this use; products therefore require a Class EA channel (ie, Cat 6A). As of 2019, some equipment has been introduced which has connectors supporting the Class F (Category 7) channel. Note, however, that Category 7 is not recognized by the TIA/EIA. === Category 7A === Class FA (Class F Augmented) channels and Category 7A cables, introduced by ISO 11801 Edition 2 Amendment 2 (2010), are defined at frequencies up to 1000 MHz. The intent of the Class FA was to possibly support the future 40 gigabit Ethernet: 40GBASE-T. Simulation results have shown that 40 gigabit Ethernet may be possible at 50 meters and 100 gigabit Ethernet at 15 meters. In 2007, researchers at Pennsylvania State University predicted that either 32 nm or 22 nm circuits would allow for 100 gigabit Ethernet at 100 meters. However, in 2016, the IEEE 802.3bq working group ratified the amendment 3 which defines 25GBASE-T and 40GBASE-T on Category 8 cabling specified to 2000 MHz. The Class FA therefore does not support 40G Ethernet. As of 2025, there is no equipment that has connectors supporting the Class FA (Category 7A) channel. Category 7A is not recognized in TIA/EIA. === Category 8 === Category 8 was ratified by the TR43 working group under ANSI/TIA 568-C.2-1. It is defined up to 2000 MHz and only for distances up to 30 m or 36 m, depending on the patch cords used. ISO/IEC JTC 1/SC 25/WG 3 developed the equivalent standard ISO/IEC 11801-1:2017/COR 1:2018, with two options: Class I channel (Category 8.1 cable): minimum cable design U/FTP or F/UTP, fully backward compatible and interoperable with Class EA (Category 6A) using 8P8C connectors; Class II channel (Category 8.2 cable): F/FTP or S/FTP minimum, interoperable with Class FA (Category 7A) using TERA or GG45. == Abbreviations for twisted pairs == Annex E, Acronyms for balanced cables, provides a system to specify the exact construction for both unshielded and shielded balanced twisted pair cables. It uses three letters—U for unshielded, S for braided shielding, and F for foil shielding—to form a two-part abbreviation in the form of xx/xTP, where the first part specifies the type of overall cable shielding, and the second part specifies shielding for individual cable elements. Common cable types include U/UTP (unshielded cable); U/FTP (individual pair shielding without the overall screen); F/UTP, S/UTP, or SF/UTP (overall screen without individual shielding); and F/FTP, S/FTP, or SF/FTP (overall screen with individual foil shielding). == 2017 edition == In November 2017, a new edition was released by ISO/IEC JTC 1/SC 25 "Interconnection of information technology equipment" subcommittee. It is a major revision of the standard which has unified several prior standards for commercial, home, and industrial networks, as well as data centers, and defines requirements for generic cabling and distributed building networks. The new series of standards replaces the former 11801 standard and includes six parts: == Versions == ISO/IEC 11801:1995 (Ed. 1) ISO/IEC 11801:2000 (Ed. 1.1) – Edition 1, Amendment 1 ISO/IEC 11801:2002 (Ed. 2) ISO/IEC 11801:2008 (Ed. 2.1) – Edition 2, Amendment 1 ISO/IEC 11801:2010 (Ed. 2.2) – Edition 2, Amendment 2 ISO/IEC 11801-1:2017, -1:2017/Cor 1:2018, -2:2017, -3:2017, -3:2017/Amd 1:2021, -3:2017/Cor 1:2018, -4:2017, -4:2017/Cor 1:2018, -5:2017, -5:2017/Cor 1:2018, -6:2017, -6:2017/Cor 1:2018 (As of September 2023, this set is current.)

  Read more →
• 

  COVFEFE Act

  The Communications Over Various Feeds Electronically for Engagement Act (COVFEFE Act), House Bill H.R. 2884, was introduced in the United States House of Representatives on June 12, 2017, during the 115th United States Congress. The bill was intended to amend the Presidential Records Act to preserve Twitter posts and other social media interactions of the President of the United States and require the National Archives to store such items. H.R. 2884 was assigned to the House Oversight and Reform Committee for consideration. While in committee, there were no roll call votes related to the bill. The bill died in committee. U.S. Representative Mike Quigley, Democrat of Illinois, introduced the legislation due to Donald Trump's routine use of Twitter, stating "In order to maintain public trust in government, elected officials must answer for what they do and say; this includes 140-character tweets. If the president is going to take to social media to make sudden public policy proclamations, we must ensure that these statements are documented and preserved for future reference". If enacted, the bill "would bar the prolifically tweeting president from deleting his posts, as he has sometimes done". The COVFEFE Act would have also treated a president's personal social media accounts (e.g., Trump's "@realDonaldTrump" Twitter account) the same as official social media accounts (e.g., the "@POTUS" Twitter account). == Background == The bill title refers to "covfefe", a word in a May 31, 2017 tweet that Trump sent at 12:06 AM EDT, reading "Despite the constant negative press covfefe". This incomplete tweet was liked and retweeted hundreds of thousands of times, making it one of the most popular tweets of 2017, as people speculated on its meaning. The tweet was deleted at 5:48 AM EDT. At 6:09 AM EDT, Trump's account tweeted "Who can figure out the true meaning of 'covfefe' ??? Enjoy!" During the May 31 White House press briefing, Hunter Walker of Yahoo! News asked White House press secretary Sean Spicer about the tweet and if there was any concern about the president sending out incoherent tweets that stay up for hours. Spicer responded, "I think the president and a small group of people know exactly what he meant" and offered no other explanation. This unexpected response spawned additional media attention and criticism for its cryptic meaning, with commentators unsure whether or not Spicer was joking. Callum Borchers of The Washington Post's The Fix noted that the Trump administration deliberately responded in a way that encouraged the media and the public to focus on covfefe instead of other controversies like the Russia investigation, resignation of White House communications director Michael Dubke, or U.S.-Germany relations. == Legal significance of Trump's tweeting == Trump's tweets have been legally significant in the past. White House Press Secretary Sean Spicer stated that Trump's tweets are "considered official statements by the President of the United States". Some of his tweets have contradicted his agenda by undercutting or contradicting statements of public officials as well as the arguments of U.S. Department of Justice attorneys seeking to defend Trump's decisions in court. A federal appellate court cited one of Trump's tweets in upholding a lower court's order blocking Trump's Executive Order 13780 from going into effect in 2017. Courts have been clear that Twitter statements can be used as evidence of intent. Before Trump's "@realDonaldTrump" Twitter account was suspended, he blocked a number of users, preventing them from viewing his tweets or posting public replies. A group associated with Columbia University filed a lawsuit on behalf of blocked users, called Knight First Amendment Institute v. Trump. Plaintiffs successfully argued that @realDonaldTrump reply threads constituted a "designated public forum" akin to a public meeting, and therefore blocking users based on their political viewpoints violated their constitutional right to freedom of speech. The Second Circuit upheld this ruling on July 9, 2019. Regardless of the failure of the bill, Trump's tweets have been archived in accordance with the Presidential and Federal Records Act Amendments of 2014.

  Read more →
• 

  Computer security

  Computer security (also cybersecurity, digital security, or information technology (IT) security) is a subdiscipline within the field of information security. It focuses on protecting computer software, systems, and networks from threats that can lead to unauthorized information disclosure, theft, or damage to hardware, software, or data, as well as to the disruption or misdirection of the services they provide. The growing significance of computer security reflects the increasing dependence on computer systems, the Internet, and evolving wireless network standards. This reliance has expanded with the proliferation of smart devices, including smartphones, televisions, and other components of the Internet of things (IoT). As digital infrastructure becomes more embedded in everyday life, cybersecurity has emerged as a critical concern. The complexity of modern information systems—and the societal functions they underpin—has introduced new vulnerabilities. Systems that manage essential services, such as power grids, electoral processes, and finance, are particularly sensitive to security breaches. Although many aspects of computer security involve digital security, such as electronic passwords and encryption, physical security measures, such as metal locks, are still used to prevent unauthorized tampering. IT security is not a perfect subset of information security and therefore does not completely align with the security convergence schema. == Vulnerabilities and attacks == A vulnerability refers to a flaw in the structure, execution, functioning, or internal oversight of a computer or system that compromises its security. Most of the vulnerabilities that have been discovered are documented in the Common Vulnerabilities and Exposures (CVE) database. An exploitable vulnerability is one for which at least one working exploit exists. Actors maliciously seeking vulnerabilities are known as threats. Vulnerabilities can be researched, reverse-engineered, hunted, or exploited using automated tools or customized scripts. Various people or parties are vulnerable to cyberattacks; however, different groups are likely to experience different types of attacks more than others. In April 2023, the United Kingdom Department for Science, Innovation & Technology released a report on cyberattacks over the previous 12 months. They surveyed 2,263 UK businesses, 1,174 UK registered charities, and 554 education institutions. The research found that "32% of businesses and 24% of charities overall recall any breaches or attacks from the last 12 months." These figures were much higher for "medium businesses (59%), large businesses (69%), and high-income charities with £500,000 or more in annual income (56%)." Yet, although medium or large businesses are more often the victims, since larger companies have generally improved their security over the last decade, small and midsize businesses (SMBs) have also become increasingly vulnerable as they often "do not have advanced tools to defend the business." SMBs are most likely to be affected by malware, ransomware, phishing, man-in-the-middle attacks, and Denial-of Service (DoS) Attacks. Normal internet users are most likely to be affected by untargeted cyberattacks. These are where attackers indiscriminately target as many devices, services, or users as possible. They do this using techniques that take advantage of the openness of the Internet. These strategies mostly include phishing, ransomware, water holing and scanning. To secure a computer system, it is important to understand the attacks that can be made against it, and these threats can typically be classified into one of the following categories: === Backdoor === A backdoor in a computer system, a cryptosystem or an algorithm, is any secret method of bypassing normal authentication or security controls. These weaknesses may exist for many reasons, including original design or poor configuration. Due to the nature of backdoors, they are of greater concern to companies and databases as opposed to individuals. Backdoors may be added by an authorized party to allow some legitimate access or by an attacker for malicious reasons. Criminals often use malware to install backdoors, giving them remote administrative access to a system. Once they have access, cybercriminals can "modify files, steal personal information, install unwanted software, and even take control of the entire computer." Backdoors can be difficult to detect, as they often remain hidden within source code or system firmware and may require intimate knowledge of the operating system to identify. === Denial-of-service attack === Denial-of-service attacks (DoS) are designed to make a machine or network resource unavailable to its intended users. Attackers can deny service to individual victims, such as by deliberately entering an incorrect password enough consecutive times to cause the victim's account to be locked, or they may overload the capabilities of a machine or network and block all users at once. While a network attack from a single IP address can be blocked by adding a new firewall rule, many forms of distributed denial-of-service (DDoS) attacks are possible, where the attack comes from a large number of points. In this case, defending against these attacks is much more difficult. Such attacks can originate from the zombie computers of a botnet or from a range of other possible techniques, including distributed reflective denial-of-service (DRDoS), where innocent systems are fooled into sending traffic to the victim. With such attacks, the amplification factor makes the attack easier for the attacker because they have to use little bandwidth themselves. To understand why attackers may carry out these attacks, see the 'attacker motivation' section. === Physical access attacks === A direct-access attack is when an unauthorized user (an attacker) gains physical access to a computer, typically to copy data from it or steal information. Attackers may also compromise security by making operating system modifications, installing software worms, keyloggers, covert listening devices or using wireless microphones. Even when the system is protected by standard security measures, these may be bypassed by booting another operating system or tool from a CD-ROM or other bootable media. Disk encryption and the Trusted Platform Module standard are designed to prevent these attacks. Direct service attackers are related in concept to direct memory attacks which allow an attacker to gain direct access to a computer's memory. The attacks "take advantage of a feature of modern computers that allows certain devices, such as external hard drives, graphics cards, or network cards, to access the computer's memory directly." === Eavesdropping === Eavesdropping is the act of surreptitiously listening to a private computer conversation (communication), usually between hosts on a network. It typically occurs when a user connects to a network where traffic is not secured or encrypted and sends sensitive business data to a colleague, which, when listened to by an attacker, could be exploited. Data transmitted across an open network can be intercepted by an attacker using various methods. Unlike malware, direct-access attacks, or other forms of cyberattacks, eavesdropping attacks are unlikely to negatively affect the performance of networks or devices, making them difficult to notice. In fact, "the attacker does not need to have any ongoing connection to the software at all. The attacker can insert the software onto a compromised device, perhaps by direct insertion or perhaps by a virus or other malware, and then come back some time later to retrieve any data that is found or trigger the software to send the data at some determined time." Using a virtual private network (VPN), which encrypts data between two points, is one of the most common forms of protection against eavesdropping. Using the best form of encryption possible for wireless networks is best practice, as well as using HTTPS instead of an unencrypted HTTP. Programs such as Carnivore and NarusInSight have been used by the Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) and the NSA to eavesdrop on the systems of internet service providers. Even machines that operate as a closed system (i.e., with no contact with the outside world) can be eavesdropped upon by monitoring the faint electromagnetic transmissions generated by the hardware. TEMPEST is a specification by the NSA referring to these attacks. === Malware === Malicious software (malware) is any software code or computer program "intentionally written to harm a computer system or its users." Once present on a computer, it can leak sensitive details such as personal information, business information and passwords, can give control of the system to the attacker, and can corrupt or delete data permanently. ==== Types of malware ==== Viruses are a specific type of malware, and are normally a malicious code that hijac

  Read more →
• 

  Abjjad

  Abjjad is an Arabic reading application that was launched in June 2012 by Eman Hylooz. Abjjad offers users the ability to download and read thousands of books offline through its iOS and Android applications. In December of 2020, Abjjad had more than 1.5 million registered accounts. == About Abjjad == Abjjad was founded in June 2012 by Eman Hylooz as a reader community dedicated to Arab readers, authors, and book lovers. Abjjad developed into a smart electronic platform to provide Arabic electronic books with ease to Arab readers everywhere after discovering a large gap in the world of Arab publishing, which is the legal electronic publishing, by forming strategic partnership with Arab publishers such as Dar Al-Shorouk, Dar Al Tanweer, Dar Al Adab, and Dar Al Saqi. == History == In May 2012, Oasis500 provided Abjjad with the seed funding to launch the website. In June 2012, Abjjad was launched with a budget of 15 thousand dollars. Within the first three months more than 10 thousand members were registered in Abjjad. Abjjad has participated in different local and international forums to meet several investors and entrepreneurs. In October 2012 Abjjad participated in Global thinkers forum in Amman, Jordan where Eman Hylooz, founder & CEO, presented the concept of Abjjad, its vision and future plans In mid-December 2012 Abjjad participated in Global Entrepreneurship in Dubai where it was presented to investors as a start-up and a new project in the Middle East. In February 2013 Abjjad was one of ten startups MENA apps has nominated from Jordan and Palestine to participate in startup Turkey. In May 2013 Abjjad participated in World Economic Forum in Amman, Jordan and later in June 2013 participated in Arab Net in Dubai. By the end of 2013, Abjjad won the Mohammed Bin Rashid Al Maktoum's Best Arab Start-Up Business Award for 2013. During 29 October 2013 till January 2014 Abjjad has launched their campaign for crowd funding through Eureeca Abjjad managed to raise US$161,000 in 88 days from 43 regional donors, over US$40,000 over its initial target. By the end of 2020. Abjjad had raised a $1 million investment round led by Jordan Entrepreneurship Fund, Ramal Capital Fund, and JordInvest Fund. Because the funds will be used to acquire users and e-books, Abjjad hopes to become the largest Arab electronic library as well as the largest income-generating platform for Arab authors and publishers, while also providing readers with a unique digital reading experience. == Features == The ability to read an unlimited number of books from an electronic library containing thousands of Arabic and translated books. Abjjad ebook library is constantly expanding and cooperating with new publishing houses to add more books. Reading offline without an internet connection. The application allows the user to download books in seconds and read them anywhere. Intuitive feature which include the ability to flip the pages of the book, highlight the reader's favorite quotes, and add notes, in addition to night reading mode and the option to modify the style and size of the front. The ability to interact with other readers and read their book reviews. More than 1.5 million Arabic readers make up the Abjjad reader community, and the user can read and connect with their reviews, book ratings, and favorite quotes. A virtual personal library that enables the user to rate and organize books by placing them on one of the three shelves: I will read it, currently readings, and/or read it. Abjjad's library includes various genres and literary fields, such as: reference books, novels, stories, literature, psychological books, philosophy, biography, politics, history, religion, self-improvement and human development books, as well as international books translated into Arabic. The library includes the most famous works of Arab authors such as: Naguib Mahfouz, Mahmoud Darwish, Radwa Ashour, Tayeb Salih. Aside from Arabic translation of works by well-known worldwide authors including: Elif Shafak, Fyodor Dostoevsky, Mark Manson, and others. == Statistics == In December of 2020, Abjjad had more than 1.5 million registered accounts. == Awards and honors == 2013: Won the Mohammad Bin Rashid Award for Best Arabic Startup 2014: Won the Golden Award for Jawa's "Best Online Community" 2015: Won the Business Women of the Year Award by Bank al Etihad 2016: Won the Said Khoury Award for Entrepreneurs and Innovators 2016: Won the Best Application in the Arabic Region Award by His Highness Sheikh Salem Al-Ali Al-Sabah in Kuwait. 2019: Won the Mohammad Bin Rashid Award for Arabic Language for the best artistic, cultural or intellectual world to serve the Arabic language. == Abjjad in the media == Abjjad has taken a huge interest in the Middle Eastern and western media; the author of Startup Rising: The Entrepreneurial Revolution Remaking the Middle East, Christopher M. Schroeder, has interviewed Eman Hylooz and wrote about her experience with Abjjad in his book. In addition, France24-Monte Carlo Doualiya has interviewed Ms. Hylooz on Retweet program to discuss Abjjad idea and provide the latest statistics of the website. Moreover, Sky News Arabia interviewed Hylooz to relate her experience with Oasis500 and Eureeca in Abjjad's crowdinvestment campaignPage text. furthermore, Al-Aan TV interviewed Ms.Hylooz in ArabNet in Dubai, 2013. Abjjad has been mentioned on Oasis500 website as one of the five startups which the company funded and gained different prizes. Wamda, Mediame and crowdfundinsider have discussed Abjjad's experience in the crowd investment on Eureeca. And the expert in the Arabic literature in English, M. Lynx Qualey, has interviewed Eman Hylooz in March 2013 to talk about Abjjad's story of success, how it differs from other social networks and what are its future plans. Abjjad was also featured in "Hashtag Arabi" website when it launched its premium subscription called "Abjjad Unlimited" in 2017 with the support of the Abdul Hameed Shoman Foundation. In her interview with the Jordan Times, Eman also discussed her background in computer science and software development, which helped her found Abjjad.

  Read more →
• 

  Mashup (web application hybrid)

  A mashup (computer industry jargon), in web development, is a web page or web application that uses content from more than one source to create a single new service displayed in a single graphical interface. For example, a user could combine the addresses and photographs of their library branches with a Google map to create a map mashup. The term implies easy, fast integration, frequently using open application programming interfaces (open API) and data sources to produce enriched results that were not necessarily the original reason for producing the raw source data. The term mashup originally comes from creating something by combining elements from two or more sources. The main characteristics of a mashup are combination, visualization, and aggregation. It is important to make existing data more useful, for personal and professional use. To be able to permanently access the data of other services, mashups are generally client applications or hosted online. In the past years, more and more Web applications have published APIs that enable software developers to easily integrate data and functions the SOA way, instead of building them by themselves. Mashups can be considered to have an active role in the evolution of social software and Web 2.0. Mashup composition tools are usually simple enough to be used by end-users. They generally do not require programming skills and rather support visual wiring of GUI widgets, services and components together. Therefore, these tools contribute to a new vision of the Web, where users are able to contribute. The term "mashup" is not formally defined by any standard-setting body. == History == The broader context of the history of the Web provides a background for the development of mashups. Under the Web 1.0 model, organizations stored consumer data on portals and updated them regularly. They controlled all the consumer data, and the consumer had to use their products and services to get the information. The advent of Web 2.0 introduced Web standards that were commonly and widely adopted across traditional competitors and which unlocked the consumer data. At the same time, mashups emerged, allowing mixing and matching competitors' APIs to develop new services. The first mashups used mapping services or photo services to combine these services with data of any kind and therefore to produce visualizations of data. In the beginning, most mashups were consumer-based, but recently the mashup is to be seen as an interesting concept useful also to enterprises. Business mashups can combine existing internal data with external services to generate new views on the data. There was also the free Yahoo! Pipes to build mashups for free using the Yahoo! Query Language. == Types of mashup == There are many types of mashup, such as business mashups, consumer mashups, and data mashups. The most common type of mashup is the consumer mashup, aimed at the general public. Business (or enterprise) mashups define applications that combine their own resources, application and data, with other external Web services. They focus data into a single presentation and allow for collaborative action among businesses and developers. This works well for an agile development project, which requires collaboration between the developers and customer (or customer proxy, typically a product manager) for defining and implementing the business requirements. Enterprise mashups are secure, visually rich Web applications that expose actionable information from diverse internal and external information sources. Consumer mashups combine data from multiple public sources in the browser and organize it through a simple browser user interface. (e.g.: Wikipediavision combines Google Map and a Wikipedia API) Data mashups, opposite to the consumer mashups, combine similar types of media and information from multiple sources into a single representation. The combination of all these resources create a new and distinct Web service that was not originally provided by either source. === By API type === Mashups can also be categorized by the basic API type they use but any of these can be combined with each other or embedded into other applications. ==== Data types ==== Indexed data (documents, weblogs, images, videos, shopping articles, jobs ...) used by metasearch engines Cartographic and geographic data: geolocation software, geovisualization Feeds, podcasts: news aggregators ==== Functions ==== Data converters: language translators, speech processing, URL shorteners... Communication: email, instant messaging, notification... Visual data rendering: information visualization, diagrams Security related: electronic payment systems, ID identification... Editors == Mashup enabler == In technology, a mashup enabler is a tool for transforming incompatible IT resources into a form that allows them to be easily combined, in order to create a mashup. Mashup enablers allow powerful techniques and tools (such as mashup platforms) for combining data and services to be applied to new kinds of resources. An example of a mashup enabler is a tool for creating an RSS feed from a spreadsheet (which cannot easily be used to create a mashup). Many mashup editors include mashup enablers, for example, Presto Mashup Connectors, Convertigo Web Integrator or Caspio Bridge. Mashup enablers have also been described as "the service and tool providers, [sic] that make mashups possible". === History === Early mashups were developed manually by enthusiastic programmers. However, as mashups became more popular, companies began creating platforms for building mashups, which allow designers to visually construct mashups by connecting together mashup components. Mashup editors have greatly simplified the creation of mashups, significantly increasing the productivity of mashup developers and even opening mashup development to end-users and non-IT experts. Standard components and connectors enable designers to combine mashup resources in all sorts of complex ways with ease. Mashup platforms, however, have done little to broaden the scope of resources accessible by mashups and have not freed mashups from their reliance on well-structured data and open libraries (RSS feeds and public APIs). Mashup enablers evolved to address this problem, providing the ability to convert other kinds of data and services into mashable resources. === Web resources === Of course, not all valuable data is located within organizations. In fact, the most valuable information for business intelligence and decision support is often external to the organization. With the emergence of rich web applications and online Web portals, a wide range of business-critical processes (such as ordering) are becoming available online. Unfortunately, very few of these data sources syndicate content in RSS format and very few of these services provide publicly accessible APIs. Mashup editors therefore solve this problem by providing enablers or connectors. == Mashups versus portals == Mashups and portals are both content aggregation technologies. Portals are an older technology designed as an extension to traditional dynamic Web applications, in which the process of converting data content into marked-up Web pages is split into two phases: generation of markup "fragments" and aggregation of the fragments into pages. Each markup fragment is generated by a "portlet", and the portal combines them into a single Web page. Portlets may be hosted locally on the portal server or remotely on a separate server. Portal technology defines a complete event model covering reads and updates. A request for an aggregate page on a portal is translated into individual read operations on all the portlets that form the page ("render" operations on local, JSR 168 portlets or "getMarkup" operations on remote, WSRP portlets). If a submit button is pressed on any portlet on a portal page, it is translated into an update operation on that portlet alone (processAction on a local portlet or performBlockingInteraction on a remote, WSRP portlet). The update is then immediately followed by a read on all portlets on the page. Portal technology is about server-side, presentation-tier aggregation. It cannot be used to drive more robust forms of application integration such as two-phase commit. Mashups differ from portals in the following respects: The portal model has been around longer and has had greater investment and product research. Portal technology is therefore more standardized and mature. Over time, increasing maturity and standardization of mashup technology will likely make it more popular than portal technology because it is more closely associated with Web 2.0 and lately Service-oriented Architectures (SOA). New versions of portal products are expected to eventually add mashup support while still supporting legacy portlet applications. Mashup technologies, in contrast, are not expected to provide support for portal standards. == Business mashups

  Read more →